pred_label
stringclasses 2
values | pred_label_prob
float64 0.5
1
| wiki_prob
float64 0.25
1
| text
stringlengths 30
1.03M
| source
stringlengths 38
43
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
__label__wiki
| 0.863383
| 0.863383
|
Biography, vol. 29, no. 1 (2006): Self-Projection and Autobiography in Film
Posted on January 13, 2006 by UH Press
SPECIAL ISSUE: Self-Projection and Autobiography in Film
EDITOR’S INTRODUCTION
Linda Haverty Rugg
Keaton’s Leap: Self-Projection and Autobiography in Film, p. v
In exploring what we are talking about when we talk about a film as the self-projection of a filmmaker, this introduction suggests film’s potential for not only recrafting the act of self-representation, but also for examining the nature of selfhood and its construction, as the very impossibility of cinematic autobiography aids in the discovery of a more implicated, complex, and unrepresentable subject.
Nadja Gernalzick
To Act or to Perform: Distinguishing Filmic Autobiography, p. 1
This article traces pivotal developments in the history of first-person filmic narration and subjective camera technique as the principal elements of filmic autobiography. Theoretical approaches to defining filmic autobiography, and critical distinctions between autobiographical fiction film and filmic autobiography are developed with reference to films by Robert Montgomery, Jim McBride, and Jean-Luc Godard.
Guy Barefoot
Autobiography and the Autobiographical in the Bill Douglas Trilogy, p. 14
Through an examination of the production and reception of Bill Douglas’s “autobiographical trilogy,” and a comparison with Douglas’s written description of his childhood, this article explores the problems of discussing film as autobiography, and differences between literary autobiography and autobiographical film, but also how the autobiographical remains central to our understanding of these particular films.
Christine Fanthome
The Influence and Treatment of Autobiography in Confessional Art: Observations on Tracey Emin’s Feature Film Top Spot, p. 30
This article explores the influence and treatment of autobiography in Tracey Emin’s confessional feature film Top Spot. Drawing primarily on observations by Michel Foucault, Susanna Egan, and Anthony Giddens, the essay comments on the inherent appeal of confessional art, and questions why it appears to be especially relevant within today’s society.
Peter Mathews
The Mandatory Proxy, p. 43
This article explores how Jean-Luc Godard’s film Vivre sa Vie (1962) sets about deconstructing—rather than reproducing—the autobiographical act within cinema. Central to Godard’s exercise is the decision to cast Anna Karina, his wife at the time, as the lead actress. Godard repeatedly demonstrates that the cinematic image functions as an opaque screen, a “mandatory proxy,” between actor and viewer that renders a truly authentic autobiography impossible.
Efrén Cuevas
The Immigrant Experience in Jonas Mekas’s Diary Films: A Chronotopic Analysis of Lost, Lost, Lost, p. 54
The article examines Jonas Mekas’s immigrant experience through a close analysis of his diary film Lost, Lost, Lost (1976). After explaining Mekas’s diary film practice, it studies the narrative of his American immigrant experience, helped by the chronotopic approach to literary analysis proposed by Mikhail Bakhtin.
Milan Pribisic
Carousel: Erwin, Elvira, Armin, Fassbinder, and All the Others’ Autobiographies, p. 73
I read Fassbinder’s short story, film script, and the film In a Year of Thirteen Moons itself as a bi-level, intertextual web—an autobiography of Fassbinder’s “failed” homosexuality, and a biography of a generation of Germans growing up in the post-World War 2 West Germany to which Fassbinder belonged.
Michael Tratner
Lovers, Filmmakers, and Nazis: Fritz Lang’s Last Two Movies as Autobiography, p. 86
Fritz Lang’s last two movies are autobiographies of a peculiar kind. He remakes two early films, transforming them into allegorical representations of the intense romantic and political triangle which shaped his early career—the triangle connecting the director Lang, the screenwriter Thea Von Harbou (who was also his wife), and the Nazi Party.
Julie F. Codell
Playing Doctor: François Truffaut’s L’Enfant sauvage and the Auteur/Autobiographer as Impersonator, p. 101
Truffaut, impersonating/performing Dr. Itard, represents multiple layers of autobiographical content through allusions to film history, his life, cultural ideals, colonial upheavals, and critiques of the Enlightenment. Instead of the optimism critics have seen in this film, I suggest that it offers a criticism of colonialism and the Enlightenment through a convoluted autobiographical ity that shifts its central subjectivity from Itard to Victor.
Jason Sperb
Removing the Experience: Simulacrum as an Autobiographical Act in American Splendor, p. 123
This article articulates how American Splendor’s filmmakers deploy post-modernity and the seemingly antithetical logic of the simulacrum as the central means of documenting the real-life experiences of Harvey Pekar. Paradoxically, the film also attempts to reveal how these experiences neces-sarily continue to exist outside the simulacrum, in an affective realm.
Theresa L. Geller
The Personal Cinema of Maya Deren: Meshes of the Afternoon and Its Critical Reception in the History of the Avant-Garde, p. 140
Maya Deren’s role within the history of the avant-garde is irreducibly tied to the reception of her groundbreaking film, Meshes of the Afternoon. In its avant-garde aesthetics, Meshes challenges the psychic structures of gendered subjectivity. By examining how the film’s critique reflected Deren’s position as a woman filmmaker, Meshes emerges as a significant work of feminist cinematic autobiography.
Garrett Stewart
Vitagraphic Time, p. 159
Two screen narratives from 2004 take up autobio/graphic techniques of visual mediation from opposite sides of a division suggested long ago by Gilles Deleuze between “European humanism” and “American science fiction.” Pedro Almodóvar’s Bad Education, about a Spanish film director confronted with a script that implicates his own erotic past, carries the stylistic possibilities of the Deleuzian “time-image” to new digitally implemented extremes in the mode of elegiac melodrama. By contrast, Omar Naim’s futurist fable The Final Cut, about a digital implant that records one’s entire life and then requires a “cutter” to edit it down for the funeral rites of “rememory,” explores a dystopian reduction of human temporality to mere cybernetic storage. In response to such autobiographical extremes, an approach through “narratography” is able to chart the tracings of memory along the grain of the cinematographic and digitized image—and their ironic amalgams—in both films.
REVIEWED ELSEWHERE, p. 193
Excerpts from recent reviews of biographies, autobiographies, and other works of interest
CONTRIBUTORS, p. 270
Posted in Biography
The Contemporary Pacific, vol. 18, no. 1 (2006)
Pacific Science, vol. 60, no. 1 (2006)
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line818
|
__label__cc
| 0.626748
| 0.373252
|
A Spooktacular UHS Halloween
Home S&S Features A Spooktacular UHS Halloween
October 30, 2017July 14, 2020
By HAMZAH ALAM
Halloween is one of the only times of the year when someone can go out as a scary clown, a favorite superhero or even as something as simple as a sheet of paper, without feeling out of place. The free candy and creativity involved in in the holiday has made it one of the most beloved of both children and adults alike, although adults lean more toward the “social interactions” side of things rather than the candy.
Halloween culture can be seen as two extremes in teenagers. On one hand, there are people who prepare extensively for the night, decorating and modifying their costumes to make them of the highest quality possible, while others may seem to care less about celebrating it. An example of the former is Jamie Kim (Jr.), who has worn zombie costumes twice.
“I spend about an hour making them,” she said. “Buying the supplies included, it takes me around 2 hours.”
She made her costume in tandem with her friend. “My friend did a…zombie face with a zipper running down it, basically showing the insides of the zombie,” she recalled.
A notable feature on her costumes is fake blood. “It really is the main part of my costume,” Kim said. “I don’t put on makeup that often, so I don’t know how to use it as well, and the colors don’t come out as well, so I just use fake blood. It’s also the cheapest material I can buy.”
An example of the opposite, however, is Saman Patrick Namazian (Jr.), who has not celebrated Halloween for a long time.
“The last time I dressed up, I was in eighth grade,” he said. “Ever since then, I really haven’t had the time to go trick-or-treating. High school has taken over my life, and between homework and studying for all of my AP courses, there’s no time for me at all to make a costume, much less go trick-or-treating.”
However, he has dressed up for Halloween several times before. “In sixth grade, I dressed up as a hippie. The main thing that made it a hippie costume was my afro that I bought from Party City. I didn’t spend much time making the costume, just about 5 minutes looking for the afro in the store.”
Students aren’t the only ones getting in on the fun of dressing up. Mrs. Valerie Thompson (Science Dept.) is one of many teachers who also dress up every year for Halloween.
“My main theme for the holiday is dead stuff,” she said. “Whenever I dress up, I always aim for being scary. In fact, when my two boys were younger, I had to do all the make up for my costume and leave for school early in the morning before they woke up for school, or else they’d be too scared for the rest of the day.”
Along with her costume, Mrs. Thompson also does landscaping decorations in her backyard, turning it into a graveyard every Halloween.
“It’s just a very fun thing for me to do,” she said. “I basically make piles of dirt to represent graves, and I already have pre-made fake gravestones, so I use them to add a little creativity to my setup. My whole neighborhood gets in on it, too, so it’s very interesting seeing all the decorations every year. Also, as a result, we get a lot of trick-or-treaters in the area.”
Trick-or-treating is an aspect of Halloween that attracts many young children and teenagers alike.
“I just recently moved here in eighth grade, so I was fascinated by this idea that people could just walk around and ask for free candy, and they’d get it,” said Kareem Farran (Sr.). “I have gone trick-or-treating in eighth, ninth and tenth grade with a couple of my friends. Last year, we stayed at home, bought a pack of candy, and watched a scary movie in the night instead of trick-or-treating, but it was fun in its own way. I might go again this year, I’m not sure yet.”
Trick-or-treating is meant for little children to some people, but to others, the age limit varies.
“I think that when you graduate high school is when you should stop trick-or-treating, because you don’t want a full-grown man standing outside your door, asking for candy,” said Farran. “A high school student might be able to pull it off because people might look at you and go, ‘Oh, he’s a high school student, it’s ok.’ But after high school, it’s pushing it.”
Some students believe that there is no age limit for trick-or-treating. “I feel like anyone can go trick-or-treating at any age,” said Yuchen Fan (Sr.). “As long as they take it seriously and dress up, of course.”
Finally, there are some people with a very specific age in mind.
“Twelve,” said Mrs. Thompson. “That should be the age that children start passing out candy rather than receiving it. I have a twelve-year-old and I know what shenanigans he’ll pull when he goes out with his friends, and it’s usually not good stuff, so I have him stay home and help me pass out candy.”
However, her children don’t miss out on the free candy. “They get a tip of candy at the very end.”
However old a person may be, Halloween is bound to be an enjoyable time, from decorating houses and yards to making scary costumes, sometimes from scratch. As previously stated, Halloween is one of the only days in the whole year where people can dress up as anything and not feel out of place. Therefore, it’s good to enjoy the holiday, if not by trick-or-treating, then by hanging out with friends. It only happens once a year, so don’t miss out.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line819
|
__label__cc
| 0.621431
| 0.378569
|
2016/2017 Season (62nd year), Art at the Institute (ART@TI)
Chornobyl: Artists Respond
Date: April 30, 2017Author: Ukrainian Institute NYC
In cooperation with The Ukrainian Institute of Modern Art (UIMA) in Chicago, Art at the Institute presented a special exhibition of original prints commemorating the thirty-first anniversary of the Chornobyl nuclear power plant disaster. Organized by Walter Hoydysh, PhD, Curator and Director of Art at the Institute, and Stanislav Grezdo, Curator at UIMA, the exhibition frames thirty works on paper by thirty selected artists from the Chicago metropolitan area.
Dominic Sansone
31, 2015,
Edition of 40, signed and numbered by the artist
Printed by the artist on Revere Silk fine art paper
On April 26, 1986, Reactor no. 4 of the Chornobyl nuclear power plant in Prypiat, Ukraine exploded, resulting in the worst peace-time nuclear disaster the world has ever witnessed. Two plant workers died on the night of the accident, and another 28 people, including first responders, died within a few weeks as a direct result of acute radiation poisoning. The World Health Organization stated that a total of up to 4,000 people could eventually die of radiation exposure and countless others from cancer related illness due to the Chornobyl disaster.
Even after many years of scientific research and government investigation, there are still many unanswered questions about the Chornobyl accident — especially regarding the long-term health impact that the massive radiation leak has on those who were exposed, their offspring, and the environmental after-effects on generations to come.
On the occasion of the disaster’s thirtieth anniversary in 2016, the UIMA commissioned a fine art print project and accompanying exhibition titled, Chornobyl: Artists Respond (April 1 – May 29, 2016, UIMA, Chicago).
The UIMA invited thirty Chicago-based artists to participate in the project — each artist to create an original print in an edition of forty. Simply put, printmaking, which involves transferring an image from an inked plate to paper, allows for the production of multiples. The prints shown in this exhibition reflect a long history and tradition of utilizing the graphic arts to reflect and communicate socio-political messages and issues of historical and contemporary importance. Coming from diverse cultural, ethnic and social backgrounds, the artists were challenged to address the project deliberating on personal and global observations and judgements, and their subsequent interpretations of the Chornobyl disaster.
The resulting artworks illustrate a range of motifs and themes, from scenes of the Chornobyl plant accident site and its immediate aftermath, to commentary on its current state and its weighty correlation to other worldwide nuclear risks and accidents. The artists’ viewpoints are as varied as the means they employed in the execution of their prints, from traditional relief, intaglio, lithographic, and screenprint techniques, to methods of additive coloring and material applications.
While the exhibition and the portfolio are composed of a multitude of voices and perspectives, they are all united in a collective tribute. Though the Chornobyl accident occurred 31 years ago, what’s demonstrably clear is that the disaster and its memory are just as potent today.
All works in the portfolio were printed in an edition of 40, in 2015, on Revere Silk fine art paper, signed and numbered by the artists, and measure 15 x 11 inches.
A fully illustrated catalog was designed and produced by Stanislav Grezdo in conjunction with this exhibition.
Previous Previous post: Geography: An Exhibition of Contemporary Neckwear Designs by Slava Salyuk
Next Next post: Petrykivka: A Ukrainian Folk Phenomenon and Living Tradition
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line821
|
__label__wiki
| 0.710606
| 0.710606
|
The Continuity Girl
By Patrick Kincaid
A comic love story in which the discovery of a long-lost version of a cult movie sheds light on a 45-year-old love affair between a Hollywood filmmaker and a real-life Loch Ness monster hunter
Nine days in: four bookshops, one cinema, and a couple of Amazon reviews...
(Photographs courtesy of Alex Breeze and Margaret Jenkins)
By now, all of you who pledged during the crowdfunding campaign should have a copy of The Continuity Girl, on your tablet or electronic reading device, or as a solid paperback book. For others, the book is available in all the usual online places, and in an increasing number of bookshops.
The official launch date was 9 March, and we celebrated it in Coventry with a party at the city's Big Comfy Bookshop at Fargo Village. There was cake, and wine, and beer, and a reading from the novel. The next day, I dropped into Kenilworth Books and Waterstone's in Leamington Spa to sign copies of the novel. It was an extraordinary thing for this debut novelist to see copies of my book on the shelves of bookshops I'd so often visited as a customer - a genuine dream come true.
From the following Monday, The Continuity Girl was 'Book of the Week' at South Kensington Books. Yesterday - a snowy St Patrick's Day - I went up to London to sign books in this incredibly picturesque shop, just a crow's hop away from the Natural History Museam, the favourite place in London of Jim Outhwaite, the Loch Ness invesitgator (and northern lad) who is The Continuity Girl's hero.
After a chat and a very welcome (because hot) cup of tea, I decided to take a trip to the East End, and to the location of a scene early in the novel, where Gemma and David watch Jonathan Glazer's extraordinary Scottish-set horror Art film, Under the Skin. This, along with the Electric in Birmingham, is my favourite cinema, an independent that looked to be thriving on this wintry afternoon. I'd love to watch a screening of The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes there one day...
The first Amazon review of The Continuity Girl was posted last Sunday - just two days after the launch. I hope that, as the weeks pass, more of you will feel able to post your opinions on Amazon or Goodreads, or both. Honesty is always the best policy where reviews are concerned, so if you feel that those initial five star reviews don't reflect your own experience, please say so. All reviews are valuable when it comes to the way Amazon present the books that they stock to the public.
Thank you again for supporting The Continuity Girl, for taking it into print and into bookshops. Do look for your name in the list of patrons, and do believe that this is something that wouldn't have been possible without you.
Digital Patron
Patron Paperback
1st edition paperback, ebook edition.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line822
|
__label__cc
| 0.730732
| 0.269268
|
KÊU GỌI ĐỀ XUẤT DỰ ÁN
Save the Children Celebrates 25th Anniversary in Vietnam
Child Right Governance
DRR & Emergency Response
Home/News/Health & Nutrition
Child Rights Governance
DRR & CCA
Global Campaign
Hunger & Livelihoods
Traffic safety for children - Responsibility of parents
Aiming to raise the awareness of parents on road safety in My Tho City, Save the Children organized series of communication sessions entitled "Traffic safety for children - Responsibility of parents" for parents from May 29 to June 20, 2020 in 14 primary schools in My Tho city. The event series was a joint collaboration success between Save the Children and Tien Giang Provincial Traffic Safety Committee, Tien Giang Department of Education and Training, People's Police Academy - Ministry of Public Security - and leaders from 14 primary schools.
Save the Children launches Global Childhood Report in Vietnam
More Vietnamese children are better off today than 20 years ago, according to the third annual Global Childhood Report 2019, which launches today in Hanoi by Save the Children in collaboration with the Department of Child Affairs under the Ministry of Labor, Invalid and Social Affairs.
The story of a H'Mong health worker in mountainous area
Confidently, I guided the whole family of pregnant mothers to go through the process to deliver the baby successfully. That’s what I already practiced many times in the on-the-job training.
We desire to save more pre-term birthed child
No one believed that the boy could recover. Miraculously, the boy overcame a difficult situation and recovered. When admitted, his weight was only 1,500 grams. When discharged, his weight was 2,300 grams.
Protecting Children Oral Health in Vietnam
Save the Children in collaboration with the Department of Education of Hai Phong northern city organized a communications event to celebrate the World Oral Health Day on March 20.
Save the Children’s program “Improving School Health and Nutrition including Oral Health in Vietnam,” supported by Wrigley Company Foundation, has been implemented in 60 schools in the three cities of Hanoi, Hai Phong and Ho Chi Minh. The program runs from 2011 to 2016.
Save the Children International is a company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales with company number 3732267 and a charity registered in England and Wales with charity number 1076822. Its registered office is St Vincent House, 30 Orange Street, London, WC2H 7HH.
© 2021 Save the Children International | Legal information
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line824
|
__label__cc
| 0.665192
| 0.334808
|
Virtual Farm Boy
You can take the boy off the farm, but you can't take the farm out of the boy.
Cleveland Orchestra in Outer Space
August 3, 2005 June 13, 2008 ~ virtualfarmboy
The one bright moment of the past weekend, with all the technological wickedness, was a trip to the Blossom Music Center to hear the Cleveland Orchestra. My friend Partho and I went, took our picnic, and sat on the broad, green, rather steep lawn. We had a view of the parabolic-shaped Blossom pavilion.
We arrived an hour and a half early, but even by then we had to park in one of the grass parking lots far away from the entrance. In my many years of going to Blossom, I’ve never parked that far away. The lawn was already full by the time we got there, but we found a place to spread out our blankets. By the time of the concert the lawn was a patchwork of every color (except green grass). It was quite a sight.
The guest conductor for the evening was Hugh Wolff, best known for being the conductor for several years of the St. Paul Chamber Orchestra, although he’s had several other gigs around the world. The program began with Richard Strauss’s Also sprach Zarathustra, known to most of the world as the theme music from Stanley Kubrick’s film 2001: a Space Odyssey. I’m embarrassed to admit it, but I don’t think I’ve ever listened to Zarathustra all the way through–unlike some of the operas and songs, I’m not a big fan of Strauss’s tone poems. It has the requisite bombast that you expect from Strauss, but ends very quietly.
The second half of the program was devoted to Gustav Holst’s chestnut The Planets, with images and animations from NASA projected on three large screens, one at the front of the Blossom pavilion, and the other two at the back of the pavilion closer to the lawn audience. Lawrence Krauss, Case Professor of Physics, was the narrator, describing the images and video and putting it into the context of the music. It was a crowd pleaser, even if a bit hokey.
The concert started at 8:30 and didn’t get done until after 10:30. By the time we made a pit stop at the restroom (where there was even a line for the Men’s Room!) and got to the car, it was pandemonium in the parking lot. Traffic was going nowhere, and we just sat in the car with the engine off for twenty minutes waiting for some movement. Finally we went another direction to get out, across an empty field. (I was praying that there was not a swamp in the middle.) By the time I dropped Partho off at home and got home myself, it was close to 1:00 AM. A pleasant, if long evening, but it took my mind off computers and web sites.
Posted in Cleveland Orchestra HolstLawrence KraussPlanetsZarathustra
< Previous It was a (mostly) bad weekend
Next > Iowa trip pictures
Virtualfarmboy.com is Timothy Robson’s personal blog. He was raised on a farm in Iowa in the ’50s and ’60s, but for most of the past 40 years he has lived in Cleveland, Ohio. He is trained as a classical musician and as a librarian, but his interests range far and wide.
Tim reviews classical music concerts for both ClevelandClassical.com and bachtrack.com.
Categories Select Category Books (7) Case Western Reserve University (3) Church (21) Concert Reviews (3) Bachtrack.com (2) ClevelandClassical.com (1) Culture (117) Fashion (1) Food (8) Recipes (1) Restaurants (1) Friends (4) General (81) history (3) Holidays (8) Libraries (8) Literature (2) Movies (5) Music (189) Chamber music (2) Choral Music (19) Cleveland Orchestra (51) Opera (43) Orchestral Music (5) Organ Music (37) Other Wild Music (9) Popular Music (9) Recordings I Like (23) Vocal Music (10) My Pets (4) politics (11) Rants and Raves (28) Technology (27) Theater (3) Travails (3) Travel (32) Uncategorized (12)
Archives Select Month November 2015 July 2014 June 2014 November 2013 November 2011 August 2011 June 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 April 2008 March 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 January 2007 December 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 February 2004 December 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 April 2003 March 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002 February 2002
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line825
|
__label__wiki
| 0.674783
| 0.674783
|
A Ring of Their Own: The Good Fight
Bernie McCoy
“It's time for the girls to stop being made a sideshow attraction for the men and have a platform of their own. There's a tremendous number of talented women boxers who can't get fights on a regular basis. We're going to change all that.” It was January 2005 and this was Arnie “Tokyo” Rosenthal, longtime boxing promoter and broadcaster. Rosenthal was referencing the soon-to-be-launched women's boxing program – “A Ring of Their Own” – that he had co-founded with Ken Weiss under the banner of Rock and Sock Productions. After nearly eighteen months, with “A Ring of Their Own” on the verge of the tenth program in the series, it's a fair time to assess the impact of the program on the sport of women's boxing.
Has this ambitious program “change(d) all that”? The objective answer is “No,” the sport continues to suffer from many of the ills that existed when Rock and Sock presented their first show on January 29, 2005: the top fighters in the sport continue, for the most part, to refuse to climb into the ring with each other; there continues to be a dearth of mainstream media coverage of the sport, particularly “live” TV coverage of bouts; and many of the best fighters continue to be reluctant to leave the protective cocoons of their hometown venues to take fights. Thus, in the year and a half since “A Ring of Their Own” debuted, it has been, unfortunately, business as usual for the sport of women's boxing. However, when it to comes to assessing blame for the malaise that continues to plague the sport, one would do well to look elsewhere rather than at “A Ring of Their Own.” Arnie Rosenthal, Ken Weiss and company have fought the good fight in their attempt to improve the fortunes of the sport.
Over the initial nine “A Ring of Their Own” boxing cards, fans of women's boxing have been treated to bouts that have featured, for the most part, competitive fights between well matched and skilled female boxers. Has every fight been a bell-to-bell, action-packed, crowd-on-their-feet bout? No! But the vast majority of the bouts, on those nine cards, have featured boxers who know how to box, who do not embarrass themselves or their sport in the ring. The resulting fights have, for the most part, produced a single thought: “this is a good fight, not just a good female fight, a good fight.”
And if you don't think that's a step in the right direction, take a look at any recent week's schedule of female boxing bouts, or better, review the “competitive” characteristics of the recent seven bouts of the self proclaimed “face” of women's boxing. That, of course, would be the female fighter with the most famous name in the sport of boxing, the fighter who, in a display of disingenuous irony, recently told New York Daily News writer, Tim Smith, “one of the big problems with the sport of women's boxing is that the good fighters don't fight each other.” In comparison to the usual fare of female boxing bouts and the last several years of Laila Ali's ring activity, the nine boxing cards presented on “A Ring of Their Own” have been a veritable gold standard of good, watchable, competitive female bouts.
And yet, the television exposure of “A Ring of Their Own” has fallen short of the original aims of the promoters. No television network, over-the-air or cable has picked up the show on a regular basis. Earlier this year, the telecasts devolved to weekly one hour telecasts, a reduction from the original TV incarnation of a two hour syndicated telecast of each boxing show. Even with the condensed TV version, “A Ring of Their Own” telecasts remain limited, from a coverage standpoint. For example, the shows have long lacked a local outlet in the New York TV market, the country's largest. However, it should be noted that lack of TV coverage is not the sole province of “A Ring of Their Own.” The entire sport of women's boxing has suffered thru a period of benign neglect in terms of coverage from mainstream TV, and it is to Rock and Sock Production's credit that they have continued to produce a telecast of their bouts. They have done this with scant help from the boxing establishment or mainstream media outlets and yet there has been a consistent and compelling quality to most of the fights presented on the nine cards. Rock and Sock Productions has fought the good fight.
And on this coming Friday night, June 23, they will continue that good fight with two more strong female boxing matchups. Returning to Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, “A Ring of Their Own” has scheduled female bouts featuring three top ranked Canadian fighters along with one of the best known names in the sport. That “name” comes in the person of Mia St. John, making her boxing debut for Rock and Sock Productions. St. John will face off against Jelena Mrdjenovich, the highly regarded lightweight from Edmonton. In the other bout, Lisa “Bad News” Brown will attempt to regain her super bantamweight title from Jeannine Garside, who took the title from Brown last November in the featured bout on “A Ring of Their Own” program.
I spoke with all four fighters recently, by phone, from their various locales and they are all looking forward to June 23 in Edmonton. Lisa Brown, now living in Ontario, speaks with the lilt of her native Trinidad: “I took the first fight for granted. That was a mistake. I've watched the film over and again, and believe me, I know exactly what to do this time. I've been eating, sleeping and thinking about the return bout almost from the day after the first fight. I got yelled at by (husband/trainer) Errol and even by my sponsor, Nu-Life Nutrition. So, yeah, this next time will be different. I don't like to be yelled at.”
Jeannine Garside, who took time out from gardening at her home in Windsor, Ontario to talk on the phone, not surprisingly had a bit of a different ‘take’ on the upcoming bout: “I received a lot of advice about the first fight with Lisa, including it was too soon to take a fight like that. When I won, it was considered an upset by a lot of people, except one, me. I had a lot of confidence going into the bout. You have to have that in this sport. I feel exactly the same way about the second bout, confident.” The first bout was surprising, as much for the margin by which Garside won (99-90, 98-90, 98-91) as for the fact that Garside, with only three pro fights, was able to handle Brown, a veteran of 16 bouts.. The return matchup will probably be closer, since Brown, a veteran fighter, has shown that she learns from tough fights. She came back from a draw with Kelli Cofer in July 2003 to win a decision two years later. A Garside/Brown bout is a potential main event on any boxing card in the country.
The actual “main go” on the June 23 program features Jelena Mrdjenovich, 23 years old with sixteen fights, against Mia St. John, 38 years old, 51 fights. St. John, in the late stages of a ten-year boxing career, has recently stepped in with some of the top fighters in the lightweight division, and, having done TV commentary on previous Mrdjenovich bouts, knows the younger fighter to be “young and aggressive.” St. John notes that she is very happy with the scheduled ten-round distance. “I'm, historically, a slow starter and I like to move around as I get into the rhythm of the bout. I think my experience will pay off the longer the fight goes, so I very much prefer ten rounds.” St. John readily concedes that the end of her boxing career is in sight, “Not too much longer, maybe one or two more fights. I know for a fact I won't be fighting when I'm 40.”
Jelena Mrdjenovich knows that St. John is, by far, the most experienced boxer she has faced. “She moves well and I'll try to pick my spots as the fights progresses and, at some point, move in and try to land some big punches. I'll be at 135, the heaviest I've ever been in the ring and that may take a bit of getting used to. It will be an interesting fight. I'm really looking forward to it. After that, I hope to be able to answer some of the challenges that have come my way from fighters in Canada and the U.S. All are interesting opportunities, but right now, Mia St. John is the most interesting.
Asked about “A Ring of Their Own” and the effect the program has had on the sport of women's boxing, Garside, Mrdjenovich and Brown all agreed that Rock and Sock Production has done as much, and probably more, than any promoter to further the sport by providing a platform where female fighters are the main attraction. St. John, perhaps exhibiting the pragmatism of a fighter who has been around much longer than the other three fighters, tempered her praise just a bit. “They (Rock and Sock) are promoters, pure and simple. I'm glad they're supporting the sport, but bottom line, like all of us, they're in this business to make money and the niche they've chosen is women's boxing.” St. John's comments are clear-eyed and possess a refreshing candor, reflecting the thinking of a veteran boxer who has, over ten active years, in and out of the ring, seen every facet, good and bad, that exists in the sport. The truth of the matter regarding the impact of “A Ring of Their Own” on the sport is probably somewhere in between the two views.
Certainly, Rock and Sock Productions is in the boxing business to make money and they have chosen a previously uncovered and largely neglected aspect of the sport within which to operate. They are, as St. John said, “boxing promoters, pure and simple” and that label has encompassed, over the years, both admirable and not so admirable attributes. Over the past eighteen months and nine boxing programs, Rock and Sock has had success and they have experienced pitfalls along a rocky road of marketing the sport of women's boxing. They've done it, largely, alone, and as with every fledgling enterprise, in every business, they've made their share of mistakes and experienced their share of successes. To my eye, the successes have outnumbered the mistakes and, like the vast majority of the female fighters who have stepped into the ring for Rock and Sock, “A Ring of Their Own” has fought the good fight. They continue on June 23, doing exactly what they've done best, presenting compelling female boxing bouts. And if hard work, quality fighters and competitive bouts are a path to success, “A Ring of Their Own” and the sport of women's boxing may soon be looking at better days.
Oxnard’s Crystal Morales Loses to Lissette Medal
Ex-Champ Davey Hilton Out Of Jail
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line828
|
__label__wiki
| 0.903306
| 0.903306
|
Remembering Big George: A Boxing Giant
Robert Cassidy Jr.
George Washington is one of the most important figures in American history. He was a general, a war hero and the first president of the United States.
He was a leader of men and the father of our country.
Maybe there’s something about that name. I knew a George Washington, and whether or not you’ve ever heard him, this George was one of the most beloved figures in boxing history.
The George Washington that I knew was a surrogate father to hundreds of boxers. He was also a leader of men. More precisely, he led boys into manhood and his success cannot be measured simply in boxing terms.
Washington was 79 years old when he succumbed to congestive heart failure on June 11, in New York City. Washington was a U.S. Marine and a husband and a father. He was Big George to anyone who walked into his gym in Bedford Stuyvesant, a section of Brooklyn in which your only birthright is that you are a long shot.
With the help of guys like Artie Cintron, Washington saw to it that Bed Stuy became synonymous with domination on the amateur boxing circuit. He built a dynasty at the New Bed Stuy Boxing Center that lasted more than two decades. It is one that certainly compares favorably with New York’s other great sports dynasty – the Yankees.
“He meant a lot to me,” said Mark Breland, who first came to the gym as an 80-pound 8-year-old. “He was my mentor coming up. One thing I can say about George is that I never heard him curse. I’ve been with George all those years and I never heard him curse and I’ve never seen him upset. That’s unbelievable in the boxing business. You don’t get that in boxing.”
In terms of boxing, this is what we got from George Washington.
Mark Breland – five-time New York Golden Gloves champion, U.S. Olympic gold medalist and WBA welterweight champion
Riddick Bowe – four-time New York Golden Gloves champion, U.S. Olympic silver medalist and world heavyweight champion.
Michael Bentt – five-time national amateur champion, four-time New York Golden Gloves champion and WBO heavyweight champion.
Brian Adams – national amateur champion, three-time New York Golden Gloves champion and world-rated lightweight contender.
That represents merely a partial list of Washington’s fighters. But more than the titles and the trophies, his pupils tell the story of a man who was a pillar of decency in one of the most dangerous sections of Brooklyn.
“George was the opposite of most boxing trainers,” said Bentt. “He was very jovial, very lovable, very respectful. He was a special man. He had reverence for his fighters. I never heard him curse either. I don’t know if he ever did, but if he did, I never heard it.”
“He never neglected a soul,” said Adams. “The worst boxer in the gym, George would have him thinking he was a champion. He never played favorites, whether it was Mark Breland or an average Joe working out, George would yell up to that ring, ‘Right hand champ.’ I remember George as a big, imposing figure when I first met him. But when I spoke with him, he was more of a pussycat than a grizzly bear.”
“I don’t care who came in that gym,” said Breland, who is now 43 and himself a boxing trainer. “I don’t care if people thought the kid was a bad kid. He could have just gotten out of jail, the police could have followed him to the gym, but George would never turn a guy away. People might look at a certain kid as troublesome, but that never meant anything to George. He’d just say to them, ‘Come on, let’s get the gloves on, let’s work.’ He tried to guide them, he tried to convince them they didn’t need to get into trouble, get into street fights, stuff like that.”
When Breland turned pro he was the hottest commodity the sport had seen since Sugar Ray Leonard. He was signed by Main Events and had high-powered trainers like Joe Fariello and Lou Duva in his corner. Like the Little League coach who develops Mickey Mantle, guys like Washington are often pushed aside when it’s time to turn pro. But Breland made sure Washington was in his corner for all his pro fights.
Want more fighters developed by Washington? Not all of them were Mickey Mantles, but this list is impressive – Tunde Foster, Owen McGeachey, Stephan Johnson, Ronald McCall, Carl Jones, Chico Bell, Eddie Gregg, Webster Vinson, Ernest Mateen, Leon Taylor, Henry Brent and Winston Bentt.
This should tell you a little more about Washington’s coaching style. Of all the fighters I’ve interviewed in over a decade of covering this sport, Breland, Adams and Bentt are among the most polite, respectful and successful away from the ring.
Indeed, Washington taught so much more than jabs and hooks. To me, his greatest success was giving kids hope, encouraging them to reach for the stars in a neighborhood in which too many people reached for a gun or a crack pipe. If he kept one kid out of jail, or the morgue or off drugs, that's a bigger accomplishment than any of the champions he trained.
The truth is, it wasn’t just one kid. There were so many. Some high-minded people, none of whom ever actually visited Bed Stuy, once made fashionable the slogan “Just say no,” to drugs. George Washington wasn’t a slogan, he was there for those kids every single day. He was the foundation upon which lives were built.
“He was extremely important to the Brooklyn community because he gave kids something to strive for,” said Adams, 34 and a boxing broadcaster. “Riddick was from Brownsville, probably the worst section of Brooklyn, and he made Riddick believe that the atmosphere does not make the person. Mark was from Thompkins projects, maybe not as bad as Brownsville, but rough, and he instilled confidence in Mark that even at 6'2″ and all bones, he could go out and dominate anyone he wanted. I was from Albany projects, probably the third worst projects in Brooklyn, and he made me understand that a person can leave such an area and be a productive part of society.”
“He touched countless lives, countless lives,” said Bentt. “There were guys like Terry Branch or Richard Brent, guys who flew under the public radar, but George left an indelible mark on them. The qualities that George instilled in us would always follow us no matter where we went or what we did.”
In a sport that is often cold and unforgiving, Washington had compassion. “Once I lost to this kid, Henry Milligan, he was a white fighter from Delaware,” recalled Bentt. “He was a national champion and I lost. My father was yelling at me. He couldn’t believe I had lost to this white kid. After the fight, George just walked up and embraced me in front of my father. He was that kind of guy. He was compassionate and sensitive.”
This is reality, not fantasy. So, no, not everyone who came through his gym was saved. He may have tried, but he couldn’t wrap those big arms around an entire neighborhood. Places like Bed Stuy have plenty of sad stories and the New Bed Stuy Boxing Center wasn’t immune. But one of the wayward souls that George touched was Harry Keitt, himself now an established boxing trainer. “I grew up with Harry,” said Breland. “Harry was notorious in the neighborhood. George changed his whole life around.”
When you are around kids for so long, two things happen – you stay younger yourself and you try to memorize a lot of names. It seems the kids kept Washington young, but remembering all those names was another story.
“I was with him for years and I don’t even think George knew my name,” said Breland, with a smile. “Because from day one he called me champ. I always called him Big George and he called me champ.”
“He called everyone 'Champ' because that's what everyone was who came to him,” said Adams. “When guys insisted that George call them by their name, he would make up a name. One guy’s name was Norwood and George changed his name to Norfolk. A trainer named Owen became Orange. One guy who I swore his name was Abdu because when I first met him 14 years ago that's what George called him. This is a true story. About four years ago I ran into the guy and he told me that his name was Abdilla. I fell out laughing.”
Bentt, now 41 and an actor and himself a father, remembered this about Big George while driving his son to school one day. “The thing that I recognize and appreciate now is that George never let what he saw and experienced in life and in the world of boxing rob him of his basic humanity.”
Washington had a modest record as a pro fighter. He was a heavyweight during boxing’s Golden Age and was good enough to once beat Charley Norkus and Keene Simmons; the latter went eight rounds with Rocky Marciano. Big George was also a sparring partner for the great Joe Louis. This is what he told me about Louis during an interview a few years back.
“After I got out of the service, that’s when I started sparring with Joe Louis,” he said. “We were from the same small town in Alabama, but I didn't know him from there. They picked me out of Stillman's Gym to be his sparring partner. He wanted someone who was going to make him work and I was going good then. I was his sparring partner for both Jersey Joe Walcott bouts. I went to his training camp in Pompton Lakes, New Jersey. He'd give me $20 a round. That was good money back then. I'd box four or five rounds a day with him. He didn't do all that much moving in the ring. It was short quick moves. He moved his arms like he was playing checkers, not far at all. But fast. He had great hand speed. He was the best heavyweight ever. That's the way I see it.”
Washington’s respect for Louis went beyond what the accomplished as a fighter. “He was my mentor and my idol,” Big George said of the champion. “He loved his people. He'd give anything to help you if he could.”
And so would George Washington, a man who gave his life to boxing and a Brooklyn neighborhood. Those who fought for him and loved him will always look beyond what he accomplished as a trainer. There lies the true measure of his greatness.
Boxer’s Mummified Arm Hits Big Apple
Pacquiao Decisions Larios In Manila
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line829
|
__label__cc
| 0.627403
| 0.372597
|
As part of Poland’s contribution to the Allied Forces, the Free Polish Forces formed part of the British Army’s Order of Battle, creating Armoured, Infantry and Airborne units. These fought alongside British Units. They also formed Squadrons of the Royal Air Force.
As such, they were largely equipped with British weapons and equipment, including Vickers MMG.
Polish Independent Parachute Brigade
This unit was under the command of the 1st British Airborne Division. It was an independent brigade primarily or parachute troops, with gliderborne support units, including anti-tank artillery.
The infantry of the Brigade was delivered solely by Parachute and including Machine Gun Platoons as part of its Parachute Battalions.
Polish Air Force
The Polish Air Force used British-supplied aircraft, as with the Royal Air Force, some of these were mounted with the Vickers G.O. No. 1, Mk. I.
Daventry, 1940
Reinders, 2005
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line830
|
__label__wiki
| 0.943231
| 0.943231
|
Venice Biennale - UNIC calls for films selected in competition at leading film festivals and awards to receive a full theatrical release
BRUSSELS, 25 JULY 2019: The International Union of Cinemas (UNIC), representing cinema associations - including the Associazione Nazionale Esercenti Cinema (ANEC) and the Associazione Nazionale Esercenti Multiplex (ANEM) - and key operators across 38 territories in Europe, calls for films selected in competition at leading film festivals and awards to receive a full theatrical release.
Following the decision from the Venice International Film Festival to include the films The Laundromat and Marriage Story in its 2019 official selection, the association released the following statement:
Thanks to their global prestige, leading film festivals and awards competitions have both the honour and the responsibility of bringing high quality and diverse films to the attention of audiences around the world.
For that reason, cinema operators expect both to consider only those titles intended to receive a full theatrical release and - where release strategies for films selected for inclusion are not yet confirmed - to make every effort to encourage the distributors of these titles to observe established industry norms.
The inclusion of films in official selections that are within the reach of everyone - and not only that of streaming platform subscribers - benefits the audience as a whole. Where films are available solely on these platforms, or receive only a limited "technical" release in cinemas, festival/award selection becomes in truth only a marketing tool whereby most of the potential audience is denied access to a wealth of great content.
Cinemas offer their audiences an unparalleled cultural and social experience, which through state of the art technologies allow each film truly to do justice to the creative vision of its director. Not only do they represent the gold standard for film viewing, but in general theatrical releases also provide the opportunity for the widest possible audience to discover and enjoy as broad a range of film content as possible, employing a fair and transparent business model of longstanding and proven benefit to audiences as well as to the wider film and cinema sector.
In short, cinema operators - who are themselves long-standing and strong partners and supporters of film festivals and awards competitions - strongly believe that those organising such events around the World should celebrate and support the social, cultural and economic relevance of cinemas, taking responsibility for the diversity and accessibility of the films they include.
You can download the full press release here.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line838
|
__label__wiki
| 0.679872
| 0.679872
|
Cool Listings, Interiors, Lower East Side
Grand Loft on Grand Street With Original Cast Iron Columns Asks $17,500/Month
By Emily Nonko, Fri, June 10, 2016
This Lower East Side loft is so grand you need a wide-angled lens to capture all its lofty goodness in a photo. The apartment comes from 345 Grand Street, a cast iron building that is now a six-unit condo. It’s just been listed for rent for a hefty $17,500 a month. With all that money comes excellent features—the original wood beamed joist ceilings, a wood-burning fireplace, a private terrace—as well as 2,500 square feet of space to spread out. Another bonus: this well-designed space will come fully furnished for the lucky renter.
$4M LES Loft Mixes 19th Century Architectural Details with Contemporary Design
By Dana Schulz, Mon, October 13, 2014
While we always love a good listing in a Soho cast iron building, it’s always exciting to see this type of architecture sprinkled throughout other neighborhoods. 345 Grand Street on the Lower East Side is one such example, built in 1888, and an available loft in the building has hit the market for $3.85 million.
The 2,349-square-foot, full-floor apartment elegantly combines original 19th century architectural details with contemporary design elements like large, globe lanterns, sleek teak built-ins, and top-of-the-line appliances.
Tour the rest of this past-meets-present pad
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line841
|
__label__wiki
| 0.522248
| 0.522248
|
Avery (album)
Life (Diamonds in the Dark)
Life (KRS-One album)
Life (Sly and the Family Stone album)
Avery is the debut studio album by South African hip hop recording artist Emtee. The album was officially released on December 4, 2015.
Commercial performance
As of January 22, 2016, the album peaked at the top of the South African Hip hop / Rap iTunes Chart. The single "Roll Up" entered the top 3 of the South African Hip hop / Rap Singles Chart on iTunes.
1 2 "Check Out Emtee's Debut Album Titled Avery's Tracklist And Cover". SA Hip Hop Mag. Retrieved 2016-01-21.
↑ "Avery by Emtee on iTunes". iTunes. Retrieved 2016-01-21.
This page contains text from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia - https://wn.com/Avery_(album)
"'Life (Diamonds in the Dark)" is a song by Swedish DJ and producer John Dahlbäck featuring Swedish recording artist Agnes. Dahlbäck originally released the instrumental version of the song called "Life" in February 2012, but later got Swedish singer Agnes to sing the vocals on the re-release. In an interview with American magazine "Billboard" Dahlbäck commented on the co-operation with Agnes; "“She’s one of the biggest pop stars in Sweden, so for me it was a big honor to have her on the track. This may not be what she’d do normally, but she’s very happy with the result.”
The song is released together with three remixes that will accompany the February 25 release. Dahlback selected remixes from Australian upstarts Feenixpawl, fellow Swedish DJs Lunde Bros., and Canadian electro-house artist Lazy Rich.
(Released: February 25, 2013)
"Life (Diamonds in the Dark) - Original Mix " —
"Life (Diamonds in the Dark) - Feenixpawl remix " —
"Life (Diamonds in the Dark) - Lunde Bros. remix" —
This page contains text from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia - https://wn.com/Life_(Diamonds_in_the_Dark)
Life is the eighth album released by KRS-One, and the eighth after abandoning the Boogie Down Productions name. The album is a collaboration with Tunnel Rats affiliates The Resistance, a little known production team, and Footsoldiers.
Instrumental Credits
"I'm On The Mic"
Scratches: Rhettmatic
"Life Interlude"
Scratches: DJ Wize
Life at Discogs
This page contains text from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia - https://wn.com/Life_(KRS-One_album)
Life is the third studio album by funk/soul band Sly and the Family Stone, released in September 1968 on Epic/CBS Records.
Unlike its predecessor, Dance to the Music, Life was not a commercial success, although it has received mostly positive reviews from music critics over the years. Many of its songs, including "M'Lady", "Fun", "Love City", as well as the title track, became popular staples in the Family Stone's live show. A middle ground between the fiery A Whole New Thing and the more commercial Dance to the Music, Life features very little use of studio effects, and is instead more driven by frontman Sly Stone's compositions. Topics for the album's songs include the dating scene ("Dynamite!", "Chicken", "M'Lady"), groupies ("Jane is a Groupee"), and "plastic" (or "fake") people (the Beatlesque "Plastic Jim"). Of particular note is that the Family Stone's main themes of unity and integration are explored here in several songs ("Fun", "Harmony", "Life", and "Love City"). The next Family Stone LP, Stand!, would focus almost exclusively on these topics.
This page contains text from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia - https://wn.com/Life_(Sly_and_the_Family_Stone_album)
reggaelife.com
averylife.net
averylife.org
daytodaylife.org
healthylivelife.com
denmarklifeinsurance.com
locking4life.org
certainlifeinsurancetrust.com
estonialife.com
cebucitylife.com
laplatalife.com
malibubeachlife.com
murcialife.com
feministlife.com
russialife.com
lifeinsuranceceo.com
tiestoclublife.net
cityoflondonlife.com
changethelifeforwomen.com
slovenialife.com
Set Me Free, Everlife
Lead the Way, Everlife
Heaven Open Your Eyes, Everlife
Getting Closer, Everlife
Evidence, Everlife
Even When, Everlife
Now Or Never, Everlife
You never take, Everlife
I'm Over It, Everlife
Find Yourself In You, Everlife
Goodbye, Everlife
Angels Cry, Everlife
Where You Are, Everlife
TAKE A RIDE, Everlife
Strangers Like Me, Everlife
Static, Everlife
Save Me, Everlife
Reflection, Everlife
Real Wild Child, Everlife
Look Through My Eyes, Everlife
I Could Get Used To This, Everlife
I Can See Clearly Now, Everlife
Go Figure, Everlife
Forever, Everlife
Faded, Everlife
Everyday Is Christmas, Everlife
Daring To Be Different, Everlife
Cream Cakes, Everlife
Attention, Everlife
Where My Hearts Belong, Overlife
Under God's Blinded Eyes, Overlife
Sleepers, Overlife
Riding Through My Mind, Overlife
Last Millenium, Overlife
In The Shadows, Overlife
Freedom, Overlife
Everybody has a reason A longin' A hunger to reveal
It seems like every where you turn
I was searchin' for the answer i was lying to be free
You change me deep inside
I'm messing up look in my eyes
I'm searching for the promise land
Take my hand and set me free
Everytime I'm drifted
Sailing out to sea
The rock of my salvation is callin' out to me
I'm playin' for redemption
For my iniquity
I'm longing for the peace only you can give to me
[Chorus 2x]
Your love has shown me free Now I'm free
I'm free your love will never die
Yeah--
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line843
|
__label__cc
| 0.602425
| 0.397575
|
Career Counseling (8)
ND-2000.1500-160
Programs that provide information and guidance for people who need to evaluate their aptitude, abilities and interests in order to choose a vocation or career and select the type of training that will enable them to obtain and progress in positions in the public or private sector that are productive and fulfilling.
Job Finding Assistance (1)
ND-3500
Job Finding Assistance
Programs that help people identify and secure paid employment opportunities that match their aptitude, qualifications, experience and interests.
Job Training Formats (5)
ND-2000.3500
Job Training Formats
Programs that offer apprenticeships, training through business practice firms, classroom training, internships, on-the-job training, work experience or other formats for training that prepares people for specific types of employment. The training may feature formal instruction in an institutional classroom setting, hands-on experience at a job site under varying arrangements or a combination of the two as the means by which trainees acquire the skills required to perform the job.
Programs that find paid, meaningful work in a variety of community-based settings for people who have disabilities and which assign a "job coach" to work side-by-side with each client to interface with the employer and other employees, and provide training in basic job skills and work-related behaviors, assistance with specific tasks as needed and whatever other initial or ongoing support is required to ensure that the individual retains competitive employment. Included are individual placement models in which a job coach works on-the-job with a single individual and group models such as enclaves (which are self-contained work units of people needing support) and mobile work crews, in which a group of workers with disabilities receives continuous support and supervision from supported employment personnel. In the enclave model, groups of people with disabilities are trained to work as a team alongside employees in the host business supported by a specially trained on-site supervisor, who may work either for the host company or the placement agency. A variation of the enclave approach is called the "dispersed enclave" and is used in service industries (e.g., restaurants and hotels). Each person works on a separate job, and the group is dispersed throughout the company. In the mobile work crew model, a small team of people with disabilities works as a self-contained business and undertakes contract work such as landscaping and gardening projects. The crew works at various locations in a variety of settings within the community under the supervision of a job coach.
Veteran Employment Programs (1)
Veteran Employment Programs
Programs that provide resume preparation assistance, career counseling, vocational assessment, job development, job training, job search, job placement and/or other services for unemployed veterans who need assistance re-entering the workforce. Programs for homeless veterans may also provide supportive services such as clothing; access to temporary, transitional and permanent housing; referrals for medical and substance abuse treatment; and transportation assistance. Veteran employment programs may be configured for recently separated veterans, homeless veterans, veterans with service-connected disabilities and other special populations or may be broadly available to veterans in general.
Vocational Rehabilitation (6)
Programs that enable individuals with disabilities, people who abuse drugs or alcohol, or people who have emotional problems to obtain the training and employment experiences they need to achieve economic self-sufficiency. Services may include vocational evaluation, work adjustment, work experience, training in marketable skills and placement in competitive employment or a sheltered work environment.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line847
|
__label__wiki
| 0.538841
| 0.538841
|
Cape Verde Facts
Cape Verde is an archipelago, west of Senegal.
The islands of Cape Verde are divided into two groups: Boa Vista, Sal, Santo Antao, Santa Luzia, Sao Nicolau and Sao Vicente (Windward group) and Brava, Fogo, Maio, and Santiago (Leeward group).
The islands are mountainous, except for Boa Vista, Sal, and Maio.
The highest point in Cape Verde is on Fogo: Pico do Cano (2,829m), an active volcano.
Nine of the islands are inhabited but Santa Luzia is uninhabited.
The islands were uninhabited when they were discovered by the Portuguese in the middle of the fifteenth century.
In 1495 Cape Verde became a possession of the Portuguese Crown.
Cape Verde was a trading centre of the slave trade.
Sir Francis Drake, the English sea captain, attacked Ribeira Grande (now Cidade Velha) in 1585.
The Portuguese abolished slavery in their colonies in 1858 but slaves had to serve an apprenticeship for twenty years.
The status of the colony of Cape Verde changed to an overseas province of Portugal in 1951.
In 1956 Amilcar Cabral established the African Party for the Independence of Guinea-Bissau and Cape Verde (PAIGC).
Many Cape Verdeans fought in the war against Portuguese rule in Guinea-Bissau.
A coup d'etat in Portugal, in 1974, led to former Portuguese possessions gaining independence.
Cape Verde achieved independence in 1975.
Plans for unification of Cape Verde with Guinea-Bissau were abandoned in 1980.
In the twentieth century droughts in Cape Verde led to many deaths.
Many Cape Verdeans seek work abroad and send money back to their families.
A volcanic eruption began on the island of Fogo on 2 April 1995. Five thousand people had to evacuate the area. (Cape Verdeans live and farm on Fogo's eight kilometre-wide caldera.)
In November 2009 a national emergency was declared following an outbreak of dengue fever.
Cape Verde Sections
Read Birds of the Atlantic Islands
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line849
|
__label__wiki
| 0.724298
| 0.724298
|
Category Archives: CNN – Business
Watch out, Chewy. This 55-year-old pet store is coming for you
Petco is hoping the third time is the charm. The 55-year-old pet retailer launched its third IPO in company history Thursday — and this time it’s taking aim at fast-growing online rivals like Chewy. The red-hot IPO market welcomed Petco back to the public markets with open arms. After raising $817 million, Petco’s shares surged…… MORE
TikTok launches incubator for Black creators
TikTok is launching an incubator program to support 100 Black creators, a strategy to attract audiences that’s become popular with other social media sites. The incubator announced Wednesday, called “TikTok for Black Creatives,” is designed to invest in emerging Black creators and musical artists on the video platform. The three-month program will supply funds that…… MORE
Seth Rich conspiracy theorists retract and apologize for false statements as they settle lawsuit
A businessman and a fringe internet activist who each played key roles in the conspiracy theory about Seth Rich, the slain Democratic National Committee staffer whose death was used by right-wing activists as a vehicle to help exonerate Russia from its 2016 election meddling, retracted and apologized for their statements this week. “I take full…… MORE
US debt surged by $7 trillion under Trump. It will go much higher under Biden
President Donald Trump certainly lived up to his self-proclaimed status as the King of Debt during his term in office. The national debt spiked by $7 trillion during Trump’s tenure — and it’s about to soar much higher under his successor. Armed with a slim majority in the US Senate, President-elect Joe Biden is expected…… MORE
Capitol riot denialism is already here
Law enforcement agencies are rounding up suspected rioters, combing through social media evidence, and uncovering the true depth of the plot to overtake the Capitol and stop the certification of Joe Biden’s election. The story is getting bigger every day. But there is also a concerted effort underway, all across the pro-Trump media landscape, to…… MORE
The bitcoin roller coaster continues. The price of the top cryptocurrency hit an all-time high of nearly $42,000 less than a week ago before quickly falling back to around $30,000 — more than a 20% plunge. But it has roared back in recent days and is once again trading just shy of $40,000. The drastic…… MORE
Substack has become synonymous with writers looking to go independent. But for many years prior, there was a different go-to place for self-publishing: Medium. Medium, launched in 2012 by Twitter cofounder Ev Williams, has been the platform of choice for public figures to air newsworthy moments: Hillary Clinton used it to endorse President-elect Joe Biden…… MORE
Airlines and the Transportation Security Administration are stepping up security for flights to and from Washington, DC, amid threats of additional violence. The FBI has received information indicating “armed protests” have been planned at all 50 state capitols and the US Capitol in Washington in the days leading up to President-elect Joe Biden’s January 20…… MORE
BlackRock now has a whopping $8.7 trillion in assets
The record stock market run is great news for BlackRock: The owner of the super popular iShares family of exchange-traded funds reported earnings and revenue for the fourth quarter Thursday that easily topped forecasts. BlackRock, the world’s largest money management firm, ended the year with nearly $8.7 trillion in total assets — an increase of…… MORE
Late night hosts mock Trump’s second impeachment: ‘I wonder if he’s tired of all the winning yet?’
Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel and other late-night TV hosts got a second chance to make fun of an impeachment of President Donald Trump. The pair opened their shows with jokes about the second impeachment, which has never before happened in US history: “It was a day of reckoning in Washington today as the House of…… MORE
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line853
|
__label__cc
| 0.636444
| 0.363556
|
Twice the Challenge: Getting the Right Diagnosis
The signs and symptoms of learning disabilities are too often mistaken for ADHD in children who struggle to read, focus, and sit still. Here’s one family’s story and advice for getting to the root of your child’s challenges at school.
By Peter Jaksa, Ph.D.
Signs of Learning Disabilities
As a pre-schooler, Christie was the most affectionate, enthusiastic, and happy child among her large circle of friends. She was popular with her peers and adored by most of the adults in her life. She was clearly a bright, creative girl, with a ton of ability and a personality to match. She was the biggest source of joy in her parents’ life.
Christie’s parents began to notice signs of learning difficulties shortly after she started first grade. She struggled with reading and learning new facts in school. Her teacher described her distractibility, restlessness, and difficulty following directions. After speaking with Christie’s parents and teacher, her pediatrician diagnosed her as having attention deficit disorder (ADHD) and prescribed a stimulant medication.
The medication reduced Christie’s distractibility and restlessness. Unfortunately, the learning problems continued. She still had difficulty reading and struggled with spelling words. Perhaps ADHD was impairing her concentration and memory; it was difficult to tell. Christie took an inordinate amount of time to complete her homework, but her parents knew this was not uncommon for a child with ADHD.
By second grade, study time was a nightly battle to get Christie started on homework and to keep her on task. The quality of her work was inconsistent. Her parents and teachers knew she was bright and capable of much better work. But the more they pushed her, the more frustrated and reluctant she became to apply herself to schoolwork.
“Christie, you’re not even trying!” her father admonished her at the homework table. “I AM trying!” she yelled, with hurt and bewilderment in her voice. The argument that followed ended with the homework scattered on the floor and Christie running to her room. Why did her parents think she was lazy? Why did they keep picking on her? And, finally, she asked herself, what is wrong with me? Maybe she was stupid after all, as her younger brother delighted in telling her.
By third grade, Christie was falling behind her classmates in reading, spelling, and a number of subjects. Her mother spent hours working on homework with her, which often left both of them frustrated and angry. Her parents also began to see changes in her personality. Their enthusiastic, affectionate, happy child was becoming withdrawn. The once carefree, fun-loving Christie now seemed tense and stressed.
As Christie’s struggle continued, her frustration and confusion grew. She lost confidence in her academic abilities and, not surprisingly, her enthusiasm for school. She became angry and oppositional at home, particularly toward her mother. She argued and fought with her brother constantly. He, in turn, resented Christie because she was getting so much attention from their parents. Christie didn’t want the attention – she was sick of it! She withdrew from the family and spent more time in her room. Christie looked and acted like a child who never had any fun. She became the biggest source of worry and concern in her parents’ life.
Something had to give. Christie’s parents requested a meeting at school with her teacher and principal. That meeting led to a decision to have her tested by the school psychologist. Perhaps ADHD wasn’t the only problem.
The results of the tests showed their new concerns were legitimate. In addition to ADHD, Christie was diagnosed with Developmental Reading Disorder, better known as dyslexia. It is one of the most common learning disabilities, her parents were told, and treating the ADHD did not address the learning problems.
ADHD and Learning Disability
The term “learning disability,” or LD, covers a lot of territory. There is no neat, concise definition. Of all the complex things in the universe, the most complex is the human brain. People learn in unique and idiosyncratic ways.
People with LD are generally of average or above-average intelligence, but they process certain types of information differently from everyone else. When these differences cause significant impairment in the ability to read, write, speak, spell, do math, or build social skills, we call that impairment a learning disability.
Learning disabilities affect one in every seven people, according to the National Institutes of Health. Research studies show that, depending on how learning disorders are defined, 25% to 50% of children with ADHD also have one or more co-existing learning disabilities. Children with both ADHD and LD are at greater risk for academic problems, anxiety and depression, and difficulty with social and family relationships.
Like Christie, children with ADHD and LD suffer chronic frustration that takes a devastating toll on confidence and self-esteem. Their emotional problems are as debilitating as the learning and academic struggles. Like Christie, many of these children function well in the preschool years. When they start school, however, they are likely to experience emotional stress, feelings of insecurity, anxiety associated with expectation of failure, and, sometimes, depression. The emotional problems are likely to become worse over time, as the child falls behind peers in knowledge and achievement.
The difficulties with social skills and relationships that are commonly associated with ADHD may be compounded by a learning disability. Children with both ADHD and LD may have more difficulty reading social cues (such as body language), expressing themselves verbally, and learning from their mistakes.
Warning Signs and Early Intervention
Learning disabilities should be identified and treated as early as possible, preferably before the fourth grade. In a study by the NIH on problems with language and reading, it was found that 67% of students identified as at risk for reading difficulties could achieve average or above average reading ability when they received help early.
It is essential for parents to recognize the warning signs that may be suggestive of learning disability. In the preschool years, the symptoms may involve delays in talking, slow vocabulary growth, and problems in learning the alphabet, numbers, and basic facts, such as the days of the week. There may be trouble interacting with peers, and low ability to follow directions or routines. In the early grades, common symptoms are errors in reading and spelling, transposing numbers, confusing arithmetic signs, inability to plan, poor coordination, and a proclivity to accidents.
If you suspect that your child has a learning disability, ADHD, or both, take action. Get the help your child needs. Become familiar with the services available for children with ADHD and LD, and the legal rights and resources for children with disabilities under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
When Christie’s academic problems continued even after her AD/HD was treated, her parents requested a thorough educational evaluation. The testing uncovered a learning disability and provided a clearer picture of her academic struggles. Finally, her parents and teachers developed an individual educational plan (IEP) that gave Christie the help she needed.
Christie is one of the fortunate children whose ADHD and LD were diagnosed and treated at an early age. She works with a remedial reading specialist at school and is showing significant improvement. Homework is still a struggle at times, but Christie knows that, with help from others and a little more effort on her part, she can do well in school. She no longer feels helpless, misunderstood, and inadequate, and that in itself makes a huge difference in her mood and motivation.
Along with the educational interventions, Christie works with a therapist to undo the emotional damage and rebuild her shattered confidence. She enjoys a healthy level of achievement, and the nightly homework battle is an infrequent occurrence rather than the norm. Even better, the enthusiastic and fun-loving Christie is running around the house again.
Tags: comorbid diagnoses, February/March 2004 Issue of ADDitude Magazine, treating kids
Practical Strategies & Tools to Help Kids with Dysgraphia
How to Treat the Symptoms of Dyslexia
The Truth About Dyslexia in Children
The Dyslexia - ADHD Connection
Success @ School
Strategies for homework, accommodations, IEPs, working with school & more.
"My daughter has been diagnosed with dyslexia. Motivating her to read during the school year is especially...
Why Nonverbal Learning Disorder Is So Often Mistaken for ADHD
Nonverbal learning disorder (NLD) might be the most overlooked — and underdiagnosed — learning disability, in...
21 Sensory Toys and SPD Exercises for Your Sensitive Child
Children with sensory processing disorder may bristle and bolt at loud noises, pick their skin, and even bump...
9 Things I Wish the World Knew About My Students’ ADHD
On Overcoming Dyslexia — and ADHD
The Heartbreak of Childhood Anxiety
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line855
|
__label__cc
| 0.520881
| 0.479119
|
हम क्या करते हे
संपर्क कर
President Trump Backs Down From Adding 2020 Census Citizenship Question
Asian Americans Advancing Justice will continue to fight for an accurate count
July 11, 2019 — Washington, D.C. — President Donald Trump held a press conference to announce he has ended his political wrangling in court and will not seek further legal action to include the citizenship question on the 2020 Census form. While this is a clear win in the fight to count all persons in the U.S., we will remain vigilant against any additional efforts by the administration to attack our immigrant community.
Asian Americans Advancing Justice, an affiliation of five civil rights organizations, responds to President Trump’s press conference with the following statement:
“The 2020 Census is finally free to pursue its true purpose – a fair and accurate count of all persons in the United States. We view this as a clear win for everyone — regardless of party or status — who believes in upholding the U.S. Constitution.”
“This announcement today puts an end to one chapter after more than a year of lies and rhetoric from this administration, whose purpose was to stoke fear and reduce participation within our immigrant communities.”
“However, in light of the president’s executive action, we know that the administration will continue to attack and tear immigrant families apart. Among other things, Asian Americans Advancing Justice is prepared to push back and fight against any new attacks on undocumented immigrants, of which 1.7 million are Asian Americans. Our communities will not be bullied or erased from the 2020 Census.”
“Defeating the citizenship question on the 2020 Census means that our communities can and will be visible in this census. Advancing Justice is committed to getting our community to participate and getting a fair and accurate count of the Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander communities.”
Michelle Boykins, Advancing Justice | AAJC, 202-296-2300 x0144, mboykins@advancingjustice-aajc.org
Milan Chang, Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus, (415) 848-7754, milanc@advancingjustice-alc.org
James Woo, Advancing Justice – Atlanta, 404-585-8446, jwoo@advancingjustice-atlanta.org
Brandon Lee, Advancing Justice – Chicago, 773-271-0899 x200, blee@advancingjustice-chicago.org
Alison Vu, Advancing Justice – Los Angeles, (213) 241-0283, avu@advancingjustice-la.org
Asian Americans Advancing Justice is a national affiliation of five leading organizations advocating for the civil and human rights of Asian Americans and other underserved communities to promote a fair and equitable society for all. The affiliation’s members are: Advancing Justice | AAJC (Washington, DC), Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus (San Francisco), Advancing Justice – Los Angeles, Advancing Justice – Atlanta, and Advancing Justice | Chicago.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line858
|
__label__wiki
| 0.504156
| 0.504156
|
Still Spraying After Ike
Airmen of Air Force Reserve Command’s 910th Airlift Wing at Youngstown ARB, Ohio, are flying out of Barksdale AFB, La., to cover areas of Louisiana with insect spray to keep down flies and mosquitoes in the wake of heavy rainfall and flooding after Hurricane Ike, according to a Sept. 22 Barksdale release. The wing’s spray-modified C-130s, which deployed to Barksdale over the weekend, started the spraying operation on Sept. 21. The plan worked out with the Federal Emergency Management Agency was for the unit to blanket southwestern Louisiana and then move to other areas hard hit by the storm.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line863
|
__label__wiki
| 0.590143
| 0.590143
|
Gifts from A. Conger Goodyear
Gifts from Seymour H. Knox, Jr.
Clyfford Still Collection
The Martha Jackson Collection
The Norton Family Print Collection
The Natalie and Irving Forman Collection
The Panza Collection
The Dorothy and Herbert Vogel Collection
Marisol Bequest
A. Conger Goodyear was elected to the Board of the Buffalo Fine Arts Academy in 1912, following in the footsteps of his father, Charles W. Goodyear. He sat on the board from 1912 to 1914 and from 1916 to 1928, serving as secretary, treasurer, and vice-president. During his tenure, he helped organize several landmark exhibitions and spearheaded the Fellows for Life Fund, which led to the acquisition of masterworks such as Pablo Picasso’s La Toilette, 1906.
Frida Kahlo (Mexican, 1907–1954). Self-Portrait with Monkey, 1938. Oil on Masonite, 16 x 12 inches (40.6 x. 30.5 cm). Collection Albright-Knox Art Gallery, Buffalo, New York; Bequest of A. Conger Goodyear, 1966 (1966:9.10). © Banco de México Diego Rivera Frida Kahlo Museums Trust, Mexico, D.F. / Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York
Installation view of From the Collection of A. Conger Goodyear (April 30–June 5, 1966), with works by Camille Pissarro, Vincent van Gogh, Edgar Degas, and Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec. Image courtesy of the Albright-Knox Art Gallery Digital Assets Collection and Archives, Buffalo, New York.
As early as 1926, Goodyear began to donate works from his own collection to the museum. His first gifts were sculptures by Antoine Bourdelle (in 1926), Wilhelm Lehmbruck (in 1927), Frank Dobson (in 1928), and Aristide Maillol (in 1929). In 1939, after returning from New York, where he served as the first president of The Museum of Modern Art, Goodyear donated a suite of drawings by George Bellows, Salvador Dalí, Georg Kolbe, Maillol, Henri Matisse, Amedeo Modigliani, Jules Pascin, Charles Sheeler, and Eugene Speicher. In 1940, he gave his first gift of paintings, including Maurice Stern’s Bali Boy, 1913, and Camille Pissarro’s Peasants in the Field, Eragny, 1890. In 1954, he gifted 49 works, the majority of which were drawings.
Goodyear’s generosity continued unabated until his death in 1964, by which time he had donated nearly 300 artworks to the museum. He also bequeathed many important works, including Giacomo Balla’s Dinamismo di un Cane al Guinzaglio (Dynamism of a Dog on a Leash), 1912; Salvador Dalí’s The Transparent Simulacrum of the Feigned Image, 1938; and Frida Kahlo’s Self-Portrait with Monkey, 1938. Shortly before his death, the museum established the A. Conger Goodyear Fund for the acquisition of new artwork, greatly enhancing its ability to grow its collection in the years to come.
Highlighted Gifts from A. Conger Goodyear All Gifts from A. Conger Goodyear
Dinamismo di un cane al guinzaglio (Dynamism of a Dog on a Leash) , 1912
The Transparent Simulacrum of the Feigned Image , 1938
Horse with Head Lowered , ca. 1885 (cast executed 1919-1921)
Manaò tupapaú (Spirit of the Dead Watching) , 1892
La maison de La Crau (The Old Mill) , 1888
Self-Portrait with Monkey , 1938
Femme assise (Seated Woman) , 1935
En scene , ca. 1901
Paysans dans les champs, Éragny (Peasants in the Fields, Éragny) , 1890
Femme retroussant sa chemise (Woman Lifting Her Chemise) , 1901
Related Exhibition
Exhibition of Modern European Sculpture
October 30–November 20, 1927
The Long Curve: 150 Years of Visionary Collecting at the Albright-Knox Art Gallery
November 4, 2011–March 4, 2012
Living Art: A. Conger Goodyear and Sculpture
Paintings, Sculpture, Drawings, Prints Collected by A. Conger Goodyear
Bust of A. Conger Goodyear
Shop AK
Featuring works gifted by A. Conger Goodyear
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line865
|
__label__wiki
| 0.722929
| 0.722929
|
The Grand Tour’s first season (series, in British-talk) has ended, and with it has come more questions than answers regarding the much-awaited reboot of the world’s three most famous public television alumni. Is The Grand Tour good? Is it bad? Is it just OK? Is “the American,” sweetly, mercifully going to be a one-season guest? Will Celebrity Brain Crash finally stop torturing us for 2-3 minutes a week? Can the corny tent sketches evolve into something… watchable?
The truth is, it’s at the seams where The Grand Tour frays most noticeably. Segment transitions are wonky, filler bits are often painfully over-scripted, and the show’s big shtick – being in a tent somewhere around the world every week – has been utterly inconsequential in the larger scheme of the program. There is so frustratingly little holding the show together that we are reduced to saying “Well, the films are good. Sometimes.”
That is a long way to fall from what I would dub ‘Peak Top Gear’ around the show’s tenth to late-teenth seasons, a span that includes some of the finest semi-scripted reality television (let’s be open: that’s what the “films” are) ever produced. The Top Gear Vietnam special, often held up as the very best Top Gear episode of all time, doesn’t even have anything to do with cars. The Botswana special’s vehicles are utterly forgettable trash (sorry, Oliver sucked). The Bolivia special was most endearing for the truly excellent storytelling and sense of urgency it created in the audience, not for flashy editing, “enthusiast” cars, or extensive visual effects.
Many of us had hoped that TGT (which I will refer to it as from here out) would essentially seek to rehash Top Gear’s most beloved specials – but with increased frequency thanks to Amazon’s ample coffers. Instead, we’ve received a 4K HDR knockoff of Late Top Gear (i.e., seasons 20 onward), easily the weakest era in the show’s long history. Here is my assessment.
Best Episode: Moroccan Roll
Moroccan Roll is a rehash of one of Top Gear’s often-successful formulas: a three-way car review in unfamiliar terrain, wrapped up in the form of a road trip. The banter works, the gags are lighthearted and don’t feel too scripted, and the cars are damn good. It’s the formula for an episode that should be a classic, and in a sense, it is: it’s the only episode from the whole TGT series I think I’d willingly rewatch today. A year from now, there might be more candidates, but this is the only one that truly flowed for me. Also, the game of caravan battleships was exactly the sort of childish, outlandish, destructive behavior that so endeared fans of Top Gear over the years. Who doesn’t love trashing a trailer?
This episode feels like a medium-bright spot in the Late Top Gear era, of which there were several, though I will say it sometimes failed to hold my attention. Sadly, for every other episode, I can say at the very least they consistently failed to hold my attention.
Worst Episode: Operation Desert Stumble
Worse than the Top Gear India special. By far. Desert Stumble is over-scripted to the point of tedium, the kind of thing even your “I just watch it for the cars” uncle can’t be bothered to sit through because it reminds him these guys are trying to be funny. I couldn’t finish this episode, because it was just completely pointless on every level. I fast-forwarded to the breaks, which offered no relief from the onslaught of camo-Clarkson’s clowning.
Desert Stumble is case in point of the new show’s heavy reliance on tight scripting and caricature not just for studio segments, but for the actual films. It feels as though there is such a crunch to get everything captured quickly, efficiently, and on-budget that there is essentially no room for ad-libbing or deviation from the storyboard. Additionally, the guys feel like they’re not being themselves, but what they believe to be themselves as developed over 25 years doing Top Gear. Clarkson and Co simply don’t do well as scripted reality stars – they aren’t actors, and it shows. You do not want to watch this episode.
Runner-up, Worst Episode: Italian Lessons
On paper, Italian Lessons is exactly the show I wanted from TGT. The guys buy three old clunkers, particularly unreliable ones, and are given a pointless series of tasks which leads to 40 minutes of ad-libbed and semi-scripted remarks on the cars, banter between the hosts, and improvisational comedy.
But the formula utterly fizzled in this episode. One of the cars was so unreliable it wasn’t funny anymore (Jeremy’s), while the other two were basically fine. None of the cars had an ounce of character that shone through the film. And much of the content, even when not scripted, hemmed so tightly to the caricatures each host seems so devoted to adhering to in TGT that all suspension of disbelief was impossible. They felt like actors playing Jeremy, Richard, and James. They didn’t feel like the quirky public television hosts that had been let off the leash we’ve all come to really love over the years.
Like Operation Desert Stumble, Italian Lessons is weighed down immensely by tight production and scripting that bleeds into the “reality” of the show at the expense of believability. The bizarre sort of “semi-acting” from the cast, who seem to have no real horse in this race, does not help. It feels as though they’re merely paid to act like the scripted events are very surprising to them, and do so in a way that is in accordance with the character they have created. It makes what once felt fun, spontaneous, and personal seem tedious, planned, and artificial.
The Verdict: Many problems, few clear solutions
My individual episode critiques don’t even get to the awfulness that is “The American,” Celebrity Brain Crash, or the groan-worthy studio sketches. Because everyone knows these things are bad. I’m sure even the TGT team know those areas need serious attention on the second run-through.
But given James May has indicated that TGT is probably the end of the line for the trio in terms of a regular television series, I am unfortunately not inclined to believe the quality of the films, writing, or approach will dramatically improve. I realize many people like The Grand Tour, that it provides them entertainment, but I truly do believe there is an opportunity to do something great here and that Clarkson, Wilman, and the others are just looking at this as an early retirement package. I don’t fault them for that, I just don’t think it makes good television.
Much like Late Top Gear, then, The Grand Tour feels checked out from the opening sequence of the first episode to the goodbye of the last. A product of a team that is happy to preserve the status quo, and simultaneously is the immovable bedrock necessary for any effort to jump-start the format and approach. I think it is unlikely such a jump-start will happen, sadly – but maybe I’m wrong. I just have the sinking feeling that three or four seasons from now, TGT will end, and most of us will have stopped caring long before that.
Meanwhile, I happily await whatever James May’s next TV miniseries is.
This entry was posted in Posts and tagged grand tour season 1 review, james may, jeremy clarkson, TGT, the grand tour on February 7, 2017 by rdr0b11.
← Qisan Magicforce Review: The best keyboard I’ve ever owned
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line869
|
__label__wiki
| 0.711302
| 0.711302
|
Chemical formulas describe?
A chemical formula describe and identify a chemical compound.
When a chemical symbols and formulas are used as a shortcut to describe a chemical reaction is?
A chemical equation is used as a shortcut to describe a chemical reaction.
When chemical symbols and formulas are used as a short cut to describe a chemical reaction it is called?
A chemical equation is a shortcut used to describe a chemical reaction.
Does a chemical equation describe chemical reactions?
yes, chemical equations describe chemical reactions in terms of chemical formulas (i.e. 2C+2H-->2CH) this answer may not be right, i was dared to answer it
What is the term for a shorthand representation using formulas and symbols to describe a chemical change?
I suppose that you think to a chemical equation.
What is the difference betweeen Structural formula and Chemical formula?
There are three types of chemical formulas. Chemical formulas describe chemical reactions. Anyways, the second type of chemical formula is the structural formula. The structural formula is the most informative out of the three, and it is the longest.
What is a statement that uses chemical formulas to describe the identities and relative amounts of the reactants and products involved in the chemical reaction?
A properly balanced chemical equation.
How does a molecular formula describe a compound?
Molecular formulas are a compact chemical notation that describe the type and number of atoms in a single molecule of a compound.
What is a way to describe a chemical reaction using chemical formulas and other symbols?
Its chemically joined. So,its called chemical eqution. A symbolic way of describing a chemical reaction is called Chemical Equation
What are all chemical formulas called?
all chemical formulas are balanced
Chemical formula molecular formula difference?
There are three types of Chemical Formulas, which describe a chemical reaction. The first type of Chemical formula is called the Molecular Formula, which gives the number of each type of atom in a molecule.
Why do mixtures not have chemical formulas?
Only chemical compounds have a chemical formula; a mixture is a mix of chemical compounds with different formulas.
What do chemicals symbols and formulas represent?
Chemical symbols represent chemical elements and chemical formulas represent chemical compounds.
What does chemical symbols and formulas represent respectively?
Chemical symbols represent a chemical element.Chemical formulas represent compounds.
Can an element be represented as a chemical formula?
No, elements are the makeups of chemical formulas. No, elements are the makeups of chemical formulas.
Does a chemical equation use chemical symbals to represent a chemical equation?
yes it does and that is formulas XDformulas
What is the difference between two chemical formulas?
Different chemical formulas represent different chemical substances.
H2O CO2 and C12H22O11 are all examples of chemical?
Chemical Formulas
What is the chemical formula for carbonated drinks?
Chemical formulas are not used to describe mixtures. Carbonated drinks are a mixture of water, sugars and flavorings with carbon dioxide gas dissolved in the water.
What are some metals that do not have chemical formulas?
The metals by themselves do not have chemical formulas, they have chemical symbols which are shown on the periodic table of the elements. They only have chemical formulas if they are chemically bonded to another element, usually a nonmetal.
Do chemical formulas represent a compound?
Not all chemical formulas represent a compound. Chemical formulas that contain two or more elements represent a compound. Chemical formulas can also represent diatomic molecules, such as H2 or O2. Sulfur is represented by the formula S8.
What is chemical formulars?
The chemical formulas are a representation of the chemical composition of a compound.
Can you show me a example of chemical formulas?
an example of chemical formulas is sodium chloride also called NaCl
What are the parts of chemical formulas?
The number of elements and molecules in simplest form make up chemical formulas.
What can chemical formulas represent?
A chemical formula represent the chemical composition of a compound.
ChemistryPhysicsHealth
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line870
|
__label__wiki
| 0.780677
| 0.780677
|
Todd Buchholz
Trend Forecaster, Investor & Author
Todd Buchholz “lights up economics with a wickedly sparkling wit,” says the Associated Press. He recently jousted with James Carville and Ben Stein, and Successful Meetings Magazine named him one of the “21 Top Speakers for the 21st Century.” His editorials in The Wall Street Journal and commentaries on PBS correctly forecast the 2001 slowdown in the US, the 2008 pop in commodity prices, and the downgrade of the US debt rating. The New York Times has turned to him to decipher terrorist threats and the job market. BusinessWeek raved about his book Market Shock, which warned of the quicksand facing the stock market. Buchholz entertains his audiences and shows them how to thrive in a challenging economy, while gearing up for future prosperity. Read More >
A former director of economic policy at the White House, a managing director of the $15 billion Tiger hedge fund, and an award-winning economics teacher at Harvard, Buchholz targets his entertaining remarks to the cutting edge of economics, finance, and business strategy. He has advised President Bush, is a frequent commentator on ABC News, PBS, and CBS, and recently hosted his own special on CNBC. Buchholz has debated such luminaries as Lester Thurow and Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz. He is Co-Founder and Managing Director of Two Oceans Management, LLC and was a fellow at Cambridge University in 2009.
Buchholz has authored numerous books that have been translated into a dozen languages and are used in universities worldwide, the likes of which include Harvard, Duke, and Princeton. Market Shock: 9 Economic and Social Upheavals that Will Shake Our Financial Future, was released to rave reviews and dubbed “outstanding” by The Wall Street Journal. Buchholz is also author of the best-selling New Ideas from Dead Economists, New Ideas from Dead CEOs, From Here to Economy, and Lasting Lessons from the Corner Office, which were lavishly praised by The New York Times and Financial Times. His newest book Rush: Why You Need and Love the Rat Race has been named by Publishers Weekly as a “top ten” book for 2011, and has been praised by the Financial Times, Toronto Globe & Mail, L.A. Times, and the BBC, among many others.
Buchholz is a contributing editor at Worth magazine, where he writes the “Global Markets” column, and he has penned articles for The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Forbes, and Reader’s Digest. He delivered a lecture at the White House entitled Clarity, Honesty, and Modesty in Economics, and has been a keynote speaker before such groups as Microsoft, IBM, Goldman Sachs, and the US Chamber of Commerce.
Before joining Tiger in 1996, Buchholz was President of the G7 Group, Inc., an international consulting firm whose clientele included many of the top securities firms, investment banks, and money managers in New York, London, and Tokyo. From 1989 to 1992 he served at the White House as a Director for Economic Policy. Buchholz won the Allyn Young Teaching Prize at Harvard and holds advanced degrees in economics and law from Cambridge and Harvard. He also holds several engineering and design patents and is a co-producer of the Broadway smash “Jersey Boys.” Read Less ^
Business Strategies, Finance, and the Economy
What You Must Know About Blockchain & Cryptocurrencies
The “Blockchain” can disrupt the way we do business, just as the Internet, the PC, and television did in past decades. Former White House Director of Economic Policy Todd Buchholz, author of Market Shock and New Ideas from Dead CEOs, tackles the startling implications of blockchain technology, and the crypto-currencies that employ it, including Bitcoin. His writing on technology and the economy have been praised in the Wall Street Journal, on ABC News, and on the BBC. As finance, tech, and supply-chain firms from Bank of America and Mastercard to UPS, IBM and Apple rush to file patents, Todd explains where the blockchain revolution and crypto-currencies are going and what your company needs to know. Todd has delivered provocative and insightful keynotes before the world’s leading companies, and has lectured at Stanford, Harvard, University of Chicago, and many others.
Prosperity Ahead – Or Not?
As President Donald Trump promises to reshape policy from taxation to healthcare to foreign affairs, governments and companies must grapple with crucial questions: Can the new President’s tax cuts prod the economy to roar ahead, despite worldwide worries over Brexit and trade disputes? Will the Fed keep its independence? Can the president repeal Obamacare and Dodd-Frank, while fostering a new era of deregulation? Will the U.S. build up bigger and bigger debts without tackling entitlements? What’s at stake for the economy, the financial markets and geopolitics, amid foreign policy crises in Syria, Ukraine, Venezuela, and China? Todd Buchholz has delivered keynotes at the White House, Treasury Department, UK Parliament and stock exchanges from Mexico City to Tokyo to Abu Dhabi. His just-released book The Price of Prosperity is ranked #1 on Amazon for government and received rave reviews from advisers to Donald Trump, as well as from Hillary Clinton. On a nationwide radio show, Trump counselor Stephen Bannon “congratulated Buchholz for so presciently analyzing today’s economic issues.” By “connecting the dots” of the world economy, Todd will inspire you and help you develop a timely vision for the economy, the financial markets, and the dramatic impact of the presidential election.
The Price of Prosperity: How to Renew Rich Nations
What’s wrong with America and the modern economy? When rich nations begin to shatter, “everyone has a comfy bed—but fewer people have a reason to get out of it.” Todd Buchholz’s new book The Price of Prosperity is earning rave reviews from leading minds on the Democratic and the Republican side of the aisle, from Larry Summers and Alan Blinder to Larry Kudlow. In this entertaining speech Todd explains the 5 factors that can undermine rich countries, and he puts forth bold solutions to address the eroding work ethic, rising debt loads, and the challenge of patriotism in a multicultural country. Todd takes audiences on a fascinating historical tour, from ancient Sparta to the Habsburg Monarchy to the fall of the Ottomans to identify how rich nations get in trouble, and how they can get out. Here’s what the Wall Street Journal reviewer said about Todd’s approach: “Mr. Buchholz was economic adviser to George H.W. Bush. He has run a hedge fund. He teaches and writes books and is popular with TV talk-show hosts. His book reflects that range of talents in that it has the tone of a provocative and entertaining dinner speech, studded with factoids and witticisms…The result is entertaining and informative…Mr. Buchholz has raised his warning flags in a charming way.” Audiences will come away enlightened, motivated, and uplifted.
How to Compete in a Global Economy
Never before have businesses felt such excruciating pressure to compete. The go-go days of the 1990s turned into the go-sideways days of the 2000’s. What’s next? While enjoying superlow interest rates and riding a roller coaster stock market, firms have struggled to raise prices, even when their costs go up. China poses a threat but also an opportunity for new sales. Loyal customers seem ready to jump to a competitor. How can your company or industry survive and thrive? Can the Fed keep the economy recovering in the Janet Yellen era? Will Congress try yet another “stimulus?” Todd Buchholz, who led the White House Energy Strategy, will help you figure out whether OPEC and Russia can tighten energy supplies again or whether a revolution in natural gas will reinvigorate U.S. factories. Learn how the “scissors economy” opens up new business and investment opportunities. Today might be the very best—or the very worst—time to finance a loan. By “connecting the dots” of the world economy, Todd teaches how to anticipate the new trends that open up fresh opportunities for manufacturing, service and technology companies.
Is the Economy Headed Higher, or Off a Cliff?
The go-go days of the 1990s turned into the go-sideways days of the 2000’s. What’s next? How will China’s erratic growth shake up business? Will commodity inflation unhinge the economy again? Can the Fed keep the economy recovering in the post-Bernanke era? Will Congress try yet another “stimulus?” Todd Buchholz, who led the White House Energy Strategy, will help you figure out whether OPEC will tighten energy supplies again or whether a revolution in natural gas will reinvigorate U.S. factories. Learn how the “scissors economy” opens up new business and investment opportunities. Today might be the very best — or the very worst — time to finance a loan. By “connecting the dots” of the world economy, Todd Buchholz will help you develop a timely vision for the economy and the stock market.
Rush: Why You Need & Love the Rat Race
Todd Buchholz, author of the classic New Ideas from Dead Economists and New Ideas from Dead CEOs, reveals why we need competition to keep us going and going strong. Weaving in everything from neuroeconomics to evolutionary biology to renaissance art to General Motors, Buchholz will convince you that the race to compete has not only made us taller and smarter, it’s what we love and need. In this provocative keynote presentation, Buchholz explains why laid-back firms get entangled in their own red tape and why contented CEOs end up driving their employees to bankruptcy court. While Buchholz argues that businesses need internal competition, he shows how to inspire creative competition, rather than a shark-infested culture. This is a cutting edge presentation that defies and shreds conventional wisdom.
New Ideas from Dead CEOs
Todd Buchholz brings to life history’s greatest CEOs — from Steve Jobs to Ray Kroc to Akio Morita, Estée Lauder to Tom Watson Sr. — and shows how their lives, leadership and lessons can inform and inspire us in today’s chaotic marketplace. How did Sam Walton help create the “scissors economy” and go from being the owner of a single dime store to the CEO of Wal-Mart? How did Estée Lauder, a working-class woman from Queens, convince the shoppers at Saks to buy her cosmetics? How did the San Francisco earthquake of 1906 eventually lead to A.P. Giannini’s success as America’s greatest banker? In this speech, Buchholz answers these questions and shows today’s business managers how to deploy their entrepreneurial secrets to benefit their companies in today’s hyper-competitive global economy. He uses his experience as a White House economist, Harvard scholar and Wall Street professional to show investors what kinds of CEOs to invest with and what kinds of companies to steer away from. In addition, Todd lays out a forecast for the economy and the financial markets. Audiences come away from this keynote presentation with a fresh understanding of the competitive pressures we face today, and a road map to finding success.
China: The Threat & the Opportunity
Everyone knows China offers one billion potential customers. But China also provides one billion workers eager to compete with American workers. The Chinese Communist Party has shed its communist ideology, but it still struggles to keep its people under control. By showing audiences how to anticipate China’s next moves, this original keynote speech presentation by Todd Buchholz will help you take advantage of the incredible business opportunities ahead while avoiding the landmines.
The Hope & Danger Behind World Politics
Since September 11, 2001, the world has changed, looking even more dangerous than during the Cold War era when the Soviet Union aimed missiles at the U.S. In just a few weeks during the winter of 2011, the map of the Middle East turned upside down, reposing dictators and replacing them with…who knows? Todd Buchholz takes his audience on a world tour to gauge the “hot spots” that threaten us. At the same time, though, we must appreciate the successes: the countries that have turned from dictatorships to democracies; the economies that have dumped communism for capitalism. Recently, The New York Times editorial page called on Buchholz to make sense of the terrorism threat. As a former “point man” for the White House during the Gulf War, Todd Buchholz shows his audience how to handle the risks while keeping hope alive in this expansive keynote speech presentation.
"I just wanted to share with you how wonderful Todd's presentation was yesterday. He got rave reviews from everyone, and that's hard to do with this group. He not only made economics fun, but also easily informed and educated the group on a wide range of issues, from the simple to the very complicated (which he made comprehendible). I can't praise him enough. He certainly gets an A+ and is someone that we'd have back and highly recommend."
- Town Hall South
"Excellent economic update, in laymen’s terms, not economist jargon. Very knowledgeable and entertaining. Great speaker, he challenged my thought process. Very informative while extremely engaging."
- Colorado Hospital Association
Rush: Why You Need and Love the Rat Race
Bringing the Jobs Home: How the Left Created the Outsourcing Crisis--And How We Can Fix It
Vikram Mansharamani
Lecturer, Harvard John Paulson School of Engineering & Applied Science Author, Boombustology: Spotting Financial Bubbles Before They Burst
The William R. Rhodes ’57 Professor of International Economics, The Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University
Nobel Prize-Winning Economist
Renowned Global Economist & Author
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line871
|
__label__cc
| 0.596664
| 0.403336
|
ACMD ENTERTAINMENT NEWS: "HUDSON" NEW POLICE DRAMA COMING SOON
Toronto, ON. 23 August 2017 Channel Zero in association with Have Faith Productions has reached the final stages of development for the up coming police drama, "HUDSON." The series, to be shot in Toronto will air in the US, Canada and the UK.
HUDSON captures the politics and the temperament of a city through the lives of the police officers of the 34th precinct. HUDSON is divided by two distinctly opposite neighborhoods separated by a footbridge not linking them but dividing them. A footbridge that separates the rich, famous and politically connected from subsidized housing and poverty. The episodes take you to the heart of the city from upscale streets to back alleys, social status not always pre-determining who turns up where. The men and women of the 34th precinct have been entrusted to protect and serve both neighborhoods... equally.
The officers of the 34th like the rest of us are flawed, but step up everyday to serve and protect. Most conceal their personal fears and demons, but some officers break, or may even come broken to a job that requires keeping emotions and personal prejudices in check. The 34th is no exception. Naivety and loyalty to his childhood mentor puts Officer Shawn Baker, the new, very young rookie cop's career and the integrity of the precinct at risk. His partner, Eddy Weeks, handsome, serious, intense, tries to navigate the waters for him, but finds himself in a dark place after a controversial high profile shooting. Seasoned cop, Danny Santos, protective of his fellow officers, but can't save his wife who makes a very personal decision without him. His partner, Tonya Larson, twenty-six, loyal beautiful, compassionate, tries to bring understanding and comfort to her partner, knowing all to well finding peace comes at a price often hard to live with. Complicated relationships run as high up the ladder as City Hall. Captain Matthew Stern's personal relationship with the city's strong-willed, brilliant and stunning, ADA Taylor Young, combined with the political aspirations of her boss, brings unwanted drama to the 34th precinct's doorstep. The city's Mayor has a soft spot for the 34th precinct and a good relationship with its Captain. The Mayor understands the weight of the job in a political climate constantly being wound up by the new Commander and Chief. Ron Langston came from the wrong side of the bridge to take office. His loyalty to his childhood friend, millionaire music promoter and popular club owner Quincy "Q" Harris, a man comfortable on both sides of the bridge, threatens his legacy.
HUDSON will bring some of today's hottest young actors together with US Hip Hop royalty adding to the richness and complexity of theHudson landscape.
The heartbeat of the 34th precinct is sometimes on life support, but always on duty.
Sasha Stoltz
https://twitter.com/sashastoltz
Have Faith Productions
https://twitter.com/HaveFaithProd
Labels: Entertainment News
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line872
|
__label__cc
| 0.614877
| 0.385123
|
Progressive Collapse Analysis of Existing Buildings – A Performance Based Approach
by ASI | Mar 3, 2017 | AEM, ELS, Nonlinear Dynamic, Performance-Based, Progressive Collapse
The paper describes the complexity of the seismic assessment and rehabilitation of three different existing buildings in New Zealand. The assessment was performed using Progressive Collapse Analysis. This method has been materialized into explicit requirements for redundancy in building codes. Conventionally, the engineering industry uses a simplistic procedure for most seismic assessments, which models only linear beam and column elements. This neglects the contribution of walls and slabs, leading to uneconomic solutions. Walls and slabs may be considered secondary members in other types of analysis but in progressive collapse analysis, walls and slabs often behave as primary members with slabs carrying load though membrane action and walls providing alternate load paths in case of loss or extensive damage of columns.
The buildings have been modelled using the “Applied Element Method” (AEM) [1, 2, 3]. This approach allows tracking of the structural collapse behavior passing through all stages of the application of loads including elastic stage, crack initiation and propagation in tension-weak materials, steel yielding, element separation and element collision. It has also the unique ability to accurately evaluate the dynamic Eigen modes accounting for the phenomenon of period elongation due to cracking of the structural elements during the ground excitation. Period elongation is a phenomenon that may alter significantly the response of the structures and the effects of the ground motions on the buildings. This is a significant breakthrough not only for the New Zealand industry but also for the international engineering community.
Extensive research was undertaken to overcome the modelling complexities to incorporate the specific building characteristics including riveted connections, slabs, infill panels, foundation and surrounding soil and to assess the performance of the structures using the state of the art methodology [4, 5, 6, 7]. A set of Numerical Integration Time History (NITH) analyses in compliance with AS/NZS 1170.5 [7] recommendations was completed for the Progressive Collapse methodology. Various geotechnical and material testing was undertaken to confirm the parameters used in the analysis. The ground motions were selected and scaled in accordance with Site Specific Seismic Hazard Assessments.
To validate the accuracy of the models, the results were checked against ASCE41-13 [8] acceptance criteria in conjunction with AS/NZS code requirements and limitations [7, 9]. The post-earthquake observation in one of the case studies were used to validate the results of our analysis. The results indicate the efficiency of the specific methodology to visualize the extent, magnitude and direction of any potential local or global collapse or crack occurrences within the structures and provide accurate insights on the performance of the buildings, leading to the most effective strengthening strategy.
This methodology also enables the engineers to safely design the egress routes away from falling debris, for the safe evacuation of the buildings during the earthquakes.
Prionas, I. (2016). Progressive Collapse Analysis of Existing Buildings – A Performance Based Approach, Congress on Earthquake Engineering (16WCEE). Key Words: Progressive Collapse Analysis; Applied Element Method; Performance Based Design; Period Elongation.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line873
|
__label__wiki
| 0.867528
| 0.867528
|
???aprilia.to-main-content???
Suit configurator
Other championships
Factory Works
Führerausweis
join thebearacer club
STEFAN BRADL TO RIDE AN APRILIA RS-GP ALONGSIDE ALVARO BAUTISTA
WSBK SEPANG 2015 - FREE PRACTICE
WSBK SEPANG 2015 - SUPERPOLE
Noale, 1 August 2015 - Twenty-five year old German rider Stefan Bradl, 2011 Moto2 World Champion, will take part in the remaining nine 2015 MotoGP World Championship races astride the second Aprilia Racing Team Gresini Aprilia RS-GP alongside Alvaro Bautista.
Bradl will make his first appearance on the Aprilia RS-GP at the Indianapolis Grand Prix scheduled from 7 to 9 August.
Born in the Bavarian city of Augusta on 29 November 1989, Stefan Bradl made his debut in World Championship Motorycle racing in the 125cc category in 2005. In 2008 he took two wins and finished the season fourth in the overall standings. In 2010 he moved to Moto2, a category where he would be crowned World Champion the following year thanks to four wins. His rookie year in MotoGP came in 2012 astride a Honda, a bike that Bradl raced for another two seasons, taking a second place finish in the 2013 United States Grand Prix as his best result. This season Bradl has participated in the first eight Grand Prix races on the calendar astride the Forward Racing team Open class Yamaha, earning nine points. A fractured scaphoid in his right wrist suffered during the Dutch GP at Assen forced him to miss his home race at Sachsenring on 12 July.
© Piaggio & C spa - All rights reserved - VAT 01551260506
Codice etico Aprilia Racing
MotoGp partners
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line874
|
__label__wiki
| 0.975216
| 0.975216
|
Life after death? The legacy of a posthumous album
Megan Lily Large
adam cohen
arthur russell
audika records
cascio tapes
After the passing of cult singer and poet Leonard Cohen it was announced that he and his son, Adam, had sketched out the foundations of an album that was to be Cohen’s final goodbye.
In a similar style to David Bowie, Cohen’s final albums were received to universal critical acclaim, sounding as mystical and pristine as ever on his 2016 release, You Want it Darker, which was also produced by Cohen’s son and released just nineteen days before his death.
Seven months following Cohen’s passing, Adam began piecing together what would later become Thanks for the Dance, a fitting title for Cohen’s final release, who was known for dancing around his stage of choirs and orchestras up until his last performances.
Adam enlisted numerous musicians, including Beck and members of both The National and Arcade Fire to help with the project and to build upon fragmented recordings and old sessions from 2016’s You Want it Darker.
The possibility that both grief and death could produce creativity is an interesting concept and may have proved true for Adam, an established musician himself.
In true Cohen style, the album talks about reading communist philosopher Karl Marx, sexual politics and finding beauty in the small things through enigmatic rhymes and cryptic poems.
The record was ultimately released in November 2019 to both admiration and approval from fans and critics alike, with Rolling Stone calling the album a ‘magnificent parting shot’ for Cohen.
Though in recent years, the idea of releasing an album under the name of a deceased musician has been a highly criticised topic by music fans due to the fact the artists are no longer alive to contribute nor approve the album, more recently after the premature deaths of young rappers such as Mac Miller, Lil Peep and XXXTentation.
Since the late 60s, posthumous releases have proved to be a big success amongst consumers, with the first posthumous album to take the number one spot being Otis Redding’s The Dock of the Bay after his tragically early death in a plane crash in 1967.
Since its not-so-humble beginnings, posthumous releases are par for the course for many established record labels as an easy way to make money.
So what exactly defines a posthumous release? Often they fall into one of two categories, the first being quick cash-grabs from record labels and estates looking to benefit from the legacies of big musicians, with many citing legendary hip-hop names such as Notorious BIG and Tupac Shakur falling into this category.
Other times, a musician can pass away before getting to finish a significant project, leaving their music and recordings in the trusted hands of friends, family and collaborators to continue.
Similar to Cohen’s Thanks for the Dance, George Harrison left behind a guide for completing his final album, Brainwashed, a project which Harrison had worked on from 1988 up until his death in 2001.
Following Harrison’s passing, his son Dhani and long-time friend and collaborator, Jeff Lynne — who produced his previous studio album Cloud Nine — began working together on the project. After 14 years of indefinite releases and album sessions, Harrison’s album, and his final wish, was finally completed and released to the public in November 2002.
Earlier in 1992, the relatively unknown and obscure cellist Arthur Russell died after a battle with AIDS-related illnesses. After his death, Portland label Audika Records was set up in order to release a range of carefully chosen compilations, albums and reissues taken from his archives and the label made him a significant and beloved musician in avant-garde music.
We caught up with the founder at Audika Records, Steve Knutson, and spoke to him about why he decided to start the label and what creating a posthumous album is really like.
Russell, who struggled with both completing and releasing his projects, finally reached an audience that “he longed for.” An exciting feat for Knutson, who got to compile the music he “most wanted to hear” and expose it to a new generation, after previously working as an executive at Tommy Boy Records.
In Knutson’s case, creating a posthumous album can be as easy as mastering songs, or as difficult as “baking tapes, a detailed file clean up, and editing and mixing the record.”
Knutson is often assisted by Russell’s long-term partner, Tom Lee, whom Knutson gave a plan of what he wanted to release, “I had a pretty good idea in broad strokes of what may be in the archive.” Lee, who stayed with Russell up until his death, wanted the world to know “what a brilliant songwriter and artist Arthur was.”
Although Russell left behind an archive filled with a huge amount of amazing music, for Knutson, “it was quite easy to decide on what to release.” Audika Records stands as a “labour of love and a privilege” where he can openly present Arthur Russell’s music to the world.
Though not all posthumous album releases are as straightforward as Russell’s, especially for megastars. Tupac’s seven-album posthumous discography lies within the list of big names who have been exploited by the music industry after their death.
Many dispute the fact that Tupac would have let albums such as Tupac Resurrection see the light of day, which features trite production from Eminem, unwarranted acapellas and plenty of filler tracks.
But where there’s a market, and in this case a big market, it’s hard for the music industry to say no to once again resurrecting an artist. In 2007, Forbes claimed the Tupac estate raked in $9 million from posthumous releases, more than both Eminem and 50 Cent made in 2010.
Later in 2012, Coachella spent an estimated $400,000 on hiring AV Concepts to create a hologram of Tupac to perform at the festival alongside Snoop Dogg and Dr. Dre, with the general consensus of Twitter’s reaction being less impressed and more uncomfortable with the concept.
Many critics have highlighted that posthumous albums have led to making money from musicians after their death, therefore leading to lucrative (and slightly worrying) ideas such as performing holograms of dead artists.
Other deceased musicians still being made to tour in the form of a hologram include Roy Orbison, Buddy Holly, Whitney Houston, Amy Winehouse and Frank Zappa.
However musicians are not the only people affected by this process, their families can be too. One year after the death of Michael Jackson in 2010, his first posthumous album, Michael, was released.
Jackson’s family began very publicly raising doubts to whether it was actually him singing on three of the songs on the album, Breaking News, Monster and Keep Your Head Up — otherwise known as the Cascio Tapes, after the album’s co-writer Edward Cascio.
Joe Jackson, Michael’s father, who spoke through his lawyer claimed Jackson was a perfectionist and “would never have wanted his unfinished material to be released”, whilst Jackson’s brother Randy claimed the family were not allowed inside the recording studio whilst the album was being completed.
Six years after the album’s release, a class-action lawsuit was filed by a Michael Jackson fan who purchased the album against Sony Music on the grounds of fraud.
The lawsuit contested the authenticity of the vocals on the Cascio Tapes, to which Sony raised the First Amendment defence, claiming that regardless of the songs’ authenticity, they had a constitutional right to attribute them to Jackson, ‘hypothetically’ admitting the songs were in fact not sung by the King of Pop.
“I just want to be able to perform MY OWN music.”
The debate on posthumous releases will continue for years to come, as our demand for a constant stream of new music continues, record labels and estates will continue to provide us with substandard remixes, though more and more musicians are taking precautionary steps to make sure they don’t have the same fate.
In August 2016, Frank Ocean went through numerous issues with Def Jam, describing it as a “seven-year chess game” with the label which led to his album suffering frequent delays.
In order to fulfil his contract with the record company, he released a visual project titled Endless exclusively on Apple Music and released his biggest (and arguably best) album Blonde on Ocean’s own record label Blonded, giving him the rights to his latest album and any future releases, as well as buying back his own master recordings from Def Jam.
Later in June 2019, Taylor Swift’s former record label Big Machine was purchased by music manager Scooter Braun for £237 million, which included the masters of Swift’s first six albums, including her 2017 release, Reputation, and her self-titled 2006 debut album.
She wrote a Tumblr post stating how she had tried to buy her masters for years and described Braun as a “manipulative bully” and explained “neither of these men had a hand in the writing of those songs. They did nothing to create the relationship I have with my fans. I just want to be able to perform MY OWN music.” Swift now plans to rerecord her first six albums in November 2020.
Though it’s getting easier for established musicians to buy back their releases and rerecord their older albums, the problem for up and coming musicians still lies in putting trust into record labels who may not have their best interests at heart.
Third-party apps such as Spotify and Bandcamp are making it increasingly easier for musicians to skip the record label and release their music, but it’s still proving to be difficult for artists to take the place of the label.
Featured image of Arthur Russell courtesy of Joel Sokolov/Audika Records.
Edited by Mischa Manser.
2pac adam cohen arthur russell audika records cascio tapes coachella frank ocean george harrison holograms jeff lynne lawsuit music leonard cohen lil peep mac miller Michael Jackson otis redding posthumous scooter braun taylor swift tupac you want it darker
Caught in the act: The talent behind the tributes
Cree Brown
FakeApp: Groundbreaking or dangerous?
What?! Collaborate and listen: music’s weirdest link-ups
Ed Oliver
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line877
|
__label__wiki
| 0.602757
| 0.602757
|
Jos Van den Bergh
print Summer 2018
One of the stronger works on view in last year’s Documenta 14 was When We Were Exhaling Images, 2017, Hiwa K’s installation consisting of a stack of large clay drainage pipes. In one pipe—each had a diameter of roughly three feet—viewers found a used washing table; in others, an unmade bed, some furniture, and daily utensils. The work evoked an absurd housing project for refugees. The artist, who was born in Iraqi Kurdistan, fled his native country during the Gulf War of 1990–91. Traveling by foot through Iran, Turkey, Greece, and Italy, he ended up in what became his new home country,
print January 2018
One of Kendell Geers’s most iconic works is his Self-Portrait, 1995: half of a broken Heineken beer bottle, ready to be used as a weapon, bearing a label reading IMPORTED FROM HOLLAND. As the work of a white male South African descendant of Dutch colonizers, this simple object encapsulates two of the major and returning themes of Geers’s art: violence and identity. In this recent pair of exhibitions in Brussels, both titled “AfroPunk,” he showed his own work alongside traditional African art to create compelling variations on his recurring concerns.
The show at Rodolphe Janssen included a huge
Patrick Van Caeckenbergh
In his exhibition “Les Loques de Chagrin” (The Rags of Grief), Patrick Van Caeckenbergh seemed to create his own universe by staging an eclectic group of works and installations that at first appeared to eschew clear interconnections. In an installation near the entrance, one saw three snakeskins filled with eggs, hanging vertically from an iron broom handle. It seemed that something had dripped out of these dead bodies into two chamber pots placed under the ends of the snakes’ tails. This eerie assemblage was accompanied by works including a sort of small sideboard, a display cabinet, an
print March 2017
The Belgian-German artist Carsten Höller is best known for large-scale installations that invite the viewer to participate in or activate them. But his recent exhibition “Videoretrospective with Two Lightmachines” showed another side of his work. The complex and layered show started with Light Wall IV, 2007. LED lamps went rapidly on and off, accompanied by hard stereophonic sounds of clicking, thus evoking a disorienting stroboscopic effect. According to the artist, this disconcerting welcome was intended to put the visitor in a dreamy mood that would allow her to comprehend reality in a
Jan Van Imschoot
Jan Van Imschoot is an artist’s artist, admired and respected by his colleagues but, regrettably, little known to a broader audience. The fact that he has opted for a kind of voluntary exile in the countryside of northern France doesn’t help either. But he is one of the best Flemish painters of his generation. For his latest exhibition, “Le jugement de Pâris à Bruxelles” (The Judgment of Paris in Brussels), he took a cue from Greek mythology. Paris was the Trojan shepherd prince who had to judge which of the Greek goddesses Hera, Athena, and Aphrodite deserved the golden apple with the inscription
print April 2016
Jef Cornelis
The importance of what Jef Cornelis produced during his career at the BRT—the Belgian Radio and Television company, later renamed the Flemish Radio and Television company—can hardly be overestimated. Between 1964 and 1998, Cornelis directed more than two hundred documentaries, film essays, and live broadcasts on modern art, architecture, and other topics in the cultural domain. “Inside the White Tube. A Retrospective View on the Television Work of Jef Cornelis” gave an overwhelming image of four decades of television historiography. Although today it is tempting to look at this exhibition
print November 2015
“Atopolis”
One of the two European cultural capitals of 2015, Mons was the perfect place for “Atopolis,” an awesome exhibition of twenty-three artists, organized by Wiels Contemporary Art Centre in Brussels. The show’s theme was the possibility of an ideal city in a globalized yet fragmented world. Mons was one of the first European cities to play a major role in industrialization; huge territories in and around the city were devoted to mining—and to housing the many foreign guest workers who were brought there. Around the coal mines, various nationalities lived together in specially designed communities,
When this year’s Venice Biennale director, Okwui Enwezor, asked Lili Reynaud-Dewar to propose a project, she produced My Epidemic (small modest bad blood opera), 2015. The theme of this “opera” is a reflection on AIDS, starting with a famous case from the beginning of the 2000s, when the French writer Guillaume Dustan was attacked by Didier Lestrade, a founding member of ACT UP Paris, for claiming that it was his personal and legal right to have unsafe sex and write about it.
Reynaud-Dewar, who teaches at HEAD (Haute École d’Art et de Design) in Geneva, often works with different partners as part
Jonathan Meese is nothing if not hyper-energetic. For his most recent exhibition, the German artist covered nearly all the available wall space with no fewer than twenty paintings, thirty-three drawings, and a thirteen-page manifesto on what art is, what it isn’t, and what it should be. What’s more, almost everything in “Spitzenmeesige Women (Schniddeldiddelson)”—the nonsense title of this exhibition, like those of many of the individual works, is untranslatable despite incorporating recognizable bits of German and English—was produced this year. This overwhelming assemblage resembled,
In 2003, a group of Cooper Union alumni formed an organization to maintain and promote the artistic legacy of “Bruce High Quality,” a fictional artist who died in the 9/11 attacks. Since then, the Foundation has brought the gospel of Bruce to the Whitney Biennial as well as to shows at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, and the Brooklyn Museum, to name a few. For their exhibition in Brussels, the collective produced an impressive installation that referenced two of Belgium’s best-known artists.
“Vive la Sociale!” was based on—among other things—James Ensor’s famous painting
It was in 1986 that Mark Manders began using the term “Self-Portrait as a Building” to describe the project he is still pursuing today: a never-ending accumulation of works—sculptures, installations, and so on—that interact with or comment on one another. In his recent show in Antwerp, Manders presented the latest chapter in this ongoing story, another wing in the edifice of this ever-growing oeuvre.
In Parallel Occurrences / Documented Assignments, the catalogue published in 2010 on the occasion of a traveling exhibition organized by the Aspen Art Museum and the Hammer Museum, Manders
Tony Oursler has taken Belgium by storm. “Glare Schematics,” at Galerie Albert Baronian, one of two impressive exhibitions recently on view in that country, was a crowded and outrageous mixture of works on paper and mixed-media sculpture, depicting happy people, devils, talking masks, and more. Among the sculptures were four wall-mounted, branching metal structures that evoke family trees—send-ups, maybe, of the seriousness of those who try to go back in time and rediscover their forefathers. In Oursler’s world, this is a perfect starting point for putting together sometimes absurd combinations
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line878
|
__label__wiki
| 0.770141
| 0.770141
|
Trump Is Trying To Make Voting by Mail a Partisan Issue
By Michael Sozan April 21, 2020, 11:20 am
In a deeply cynical move, President Donald Trump has attempted to convince Republicans to oppose expanding vote-by-mail options during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is essential for all Americans to be given the option to vote by mail in upcoming primary elections and the November general election, given that in the United States, the pandemic has already infected more than 784,000 people, resulting in more than 42,000 deaths. Seemingly without concern for the public’s health, Trump has cravenly claimed that if more Americans cast votes by mail, fewer Republicans will win elections. As the Center for American Progress Action Fund recently addressed, Trump’s goal of suppressing voters to boost his chances of reelection also includes his bogus claim that voting by mail leads to fraud. Despite Trump’s arguments, the real-world facts show that voting by mail does not disadvantage either major political party and is extremely popular with Americans across the political spectrum. Moreover, many Republican state officials disagree with Trump and are taking steps to expand voting by mail to help protect the health and safety of their voters.
Republican officials nationwide disagree with Trump’s partisan arguments
On April 8, 2020, Trump asserted on Twitter, “Republicans should fight very hard when it comes to state wide mail-in voting. Democrats are clamoring for it. Tremendous potential for voter fraud, and for whatever reason, doesn’t work out well for Republicans.” A week earlier, Trump attacked vote-by-mail reforms proposed by congressional Democrats, saying, “They had levels of voting, that if you ever agreed to it you’d never have a Republican elected in this country again.”
Trump’s attempts to unify Republicans to oppose voting by mail have not yet succeeded. In part this is because voting by mail is not a recent occurrence: Republicans—especially at the state and local levels—have been part of a movement for decades to support mail-in balloting, according to former Republican National Committee Chairman Haley Barbour. As experts have noted, “At its inception, vote-by-mail was championed by Republican and Democratic leaders alike. Washington’s former Republican secretary of state, Sam Reed, was for years the nation’s most prominent advocate for the reform.”
At this point, all 50 states and Washington, D.C., allow some form of voting by mail, with five states voting almost exclusively by mail. These states include the traditionally Republican Utah, as well as the perennial battleground state of Colorado. And voting by mail is trusted among military personnel serving overseas: Hundreds of thousands of them cast mail-in ballots in each election.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, many top Republican state officials who are responsible for administering elections have continued to support voting by mail, despite Trump’s partisan warnings. According to The Washington Post, “Republican officeholders in at least 16 states that do not have all-mail elections are encouraging people to vote absentee during the coronavirus pandemic.” Notably, this includes governors or secretaries of states in multiple presidential battleground states, including Ohio, New Hampshire, and Iowa, who all announced recently “that they would take steps to encourage widespread voting by mail in upcoming elections.”
New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu told his constituents, “Basically if you feel more comfortable voting absentee because of the outbreak or your inability or nervousness about just appearing in person to vote, you can vote absentee.” In Nebraska, Gov. Pete Ricketts (R) lauded voting by mail, saying, “It’s a great way for people to be able to vote … I’d encourage people to take advantage of that.” And Idaho Gov. Brad Little (R) urged “all voting Idahoans to request their absentee ballots as soon as possible so they can vote from home this year.”
States that traditionally elect Republicans, such as West Virginia, Idaho, and South Dakota, are loosening requirements and proactively mailing registered voters absentee ballot request forms, instead of requiring voters to request an absentee ballot. Other states where top Republican officeholders recently either voiced support for voting by mail or approved new rules to make it easier include Ohio, Georgia, Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota.
Trump’s attempts to stoke partisan fears about expanded mail voting are seen as unhelpful. Washington Secretary of State Kim Wyman (R) lamented such falsehoods, saying that because of them, “the public loses confidence in the foundational pillar of our system.” And Republicans in local office continue to support a vote-by-mail option. For example, the chair of the Berks County, Pennsylvania, Board of Commissioners, a self-described “conservative Republican,” wants his community to have the ability to vote entirely by mail.
Moreover, Republican “state party leaders across the country are aggressively urging their voters to cast ballots by mail.” In fact, during the week of April 6, 2020, the Republican National Committee sent a mailer to Republicans in the swing state of Pennsylvania explaining the benefits of mail-in ballots. Among other things, the Republican party mailer advised voters to avoid large crowds on Election Day and that “voting by mail is an easy, convenient and secure way to cast your ballot.” (bold on source)
A vote-by-mail option during the pandemic is popular, even with Republican voters
Recent public polls show strong support across party lines for voting by mail during the pandemic. An April 2020 public poll found that 72 percent of all American adults support voting by mail. This included 65 percent of Republicans, a sizable majority. Other recent national polls found Republican or conservative support for mail-in balloting at 58 percent and 54 percent, while a poll of Ohio voters showed 67 percent Republican support.
Voting by mail does not advantage one major political party over another
Researchers have repeatedly found that voting by mail does not give a meaningful advantage to either of the major political parties. A just-released study that analyzed data from 1996 to 2018 concluded that voting by mail does not have a discernible effect on party vote shares or the partisan share of the electorate. And one noted expert in election law recently stated that voters who mail in their ballots appear to be “about evenly split between Democrats and Republicans.”
Moreover, Republicans routinely win elections in states that have moved predominantly to voting by mail, whether at the federal, state, or local level. For example, Utah has elected Republican Sens. Mike Lee and Mitt Romney, along with a Republican governor, lieutenant governor, and attorney general. Colorado elected Republican Cory Gardner to the U.S. Senate, and Republicans have been elected to the other top statewide offices. Voters in Arizona, which overwhelmingly votes by mail-in absentee ballot, have traditionally elected Republicans to office, including former Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake and the current governor.
If anything, many Republican officials continue to believe that their party will benefit from vote by mail. The party is continuing its successful efforts to boost turnout among Republican voters who might prefer to vote from home, such as senior citizens. For example, Republicans have seen marked success in Florida, where voters use the mail-in ballot option in large numbers. Despite Trump’s attempts to turn Republicans against using mail-in ballots, Florida’s Republican Party chairman confirmed days ago that “the party will continue to run a robust vote-by-mail program.” One Florida Republican taking advantage of vote by mail: Trump himself.
Expanded mail-in voting, along with measures such as additional early in-person voting, same-day registration, and online registration, is a critically important option for all Americans during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Trump’s attempts to reduce support for vote-by-mail are not only dangerous, but they are also an unabashed partisan ploy to suppress voters who may not vote for his reelection.
Americans have the constitutional right to vote, and the health of the U.S. republic depends on people meaningfully exercising this right. People of color and other underrepresented communities continue to fight against efforts to suppress their votes. Attempts to disenfranchise voters—no matter their political affiliation—have no place in American democracy, especially during the ongoing pandemic. Instead, Trump should abandon his inexcusable partisan rhetoric and push for robust federal funding so that every American has the option to vote safely by mail.
Michael Sozan is a senior fellow on the Democracy and Government Reform team at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
Get the Latest on the Progressive Movement
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line879
|
__label__wiki
| 0.597174
| 0.597174
|
Did you know? Savannah College of Art and Design students learn from professors who have decades of professional experience and are award-winning visual artists, sought-after designers, and the legends behind iconic logos and campaigns. Learn more.
Art Schools in Florida
Written by ACR Staff. Last updated August 02, 2017.
Florida is the fourth largest state in the U.S. It is home to major cities such as Miami, Jacksonville, Tampa, St. Petersburg, and Orlando. While art museums, galleries, and performing art centers can be found all over the state, many are located in the state’s principal cities. Just a few major art museums include the Orlando Museum of Art (OMA), Ringling Museum of Art in Sarasota, the Miami Art Museum, the Museum of Contemporary Art North Miami, and the Cummer Museum of Art & Gardens in Jacksonville.
Florida is also home to hundreds of smaller galleries that showcase everything from folk to local art and the state has its fair share of celebrated living artists such Toni DiTerlizzi (Spiderwick Chronicle artist) Carol Guzy (Pulitzer Prize-winning photojournalist), and John R. Ellis (special effects artist, animator). Many famous Florida artists began their careers here as students at one of the many major art and design schools located throughout the state. Just a few top Florida art schools include New World School of the Arts in Miami and Ringling College of Art and Design in Sarasota.
Florida Art Schools
Florida is home to 40 public and 144 private colleges with nearly 800,000 students enrolled. Nearly 4,000 of these students are enrolled in Florida’s major art schools. Others may be enrolled in art programs at traditional colleges, technical colleges, or specialty schools. Florida art schools, and many traditional colleges offer degrees in Fine Art, Studio Art, Digital Art, Experimental Art, and many others. Scroll through the list below see what Florida’s Art schools have to offer.
Florida Atlantic University – Degrees Offered: B. F. A. Graphic Design; M. F. A. Visual Art: Graphic Design and Media, Technology and Entertainment
University of Florida – Degrees Offered: B. F. A. Graphic Design, Digital Media; M. A. Digital Arts and Sciences, M. F. A. Studio Art with Concentration in Digital Media, Graphic Design
New World School of the Arts – Degrees Offered: B. F. A. Visual Arts with Concentration in Graphic Design or Electronic Intermedia
Ringling College of Art and Design – Degrees Offered: B. F. A. Graphic and Interactive Communication, Illustration, Motion Design, Computer Animation, Game Art and Design
Florida State University – Degrees Offered: B. A. and B. F. A. Design with Concentration in Print Design, Interactive Design or Animation and Visual Effects; M. F. A. Art with Concentration in Design or Electronic Media
University of South Florida - Degrees Offered: B. F. A. Studio Art with Concentration in Graphic Design or Electronic and Digital Media
More Florida Schools with Art related programs:
San Francisco & Online
Top 50 Nationally for Animation (#15) - 2020
Top 40 Nationally for Illustration (#29) - 2020
Winter Park, FL & Online
Computer Animation - Bachelor's - Online & Campus
Game Programs - Bachelor's & Master's - Online & Campus
Graphic Design & Digital Arts - Bachelor's - Online & Campus
Film & Digital Cinematography - Bachelor's & Master's - Online & Campus
Mobile Development - Bachelor's - Online
Simulation & Visualization - Bachelor's - Campus
Top 5 in Florida for Graphic Design (#4) - 2020
Employment and Salary Trends for Florida Artists
Florida is home to 84,650 artists specializing in everything from fine to visual effects. This figure has decreased slightly since 2002, when the population was 86,160. Although employment of artists in Florida decreased between 2002 and 2010, salaries are on the rise. The average salary for Florida artists overall was $36,240 in 2002. By 2010, the figure had increased to $46,400. In 2010, the mean annual wage for artists nationwide was $52,290. In 2002, the average salary was $41,660.
Fine Artists: Florida was home to 700 salaried fine artists in 2002. By 2010, the population had increased slightly to 720, which is no small feat for this field, considering today’s economy. Unfortunately salaries declined, significantly between 2002 ($47,240) and 2010 ($34,940).
Art Directors: Florida had a population of 1,030 art directors in 2002. By 2010, the population had decreased to 5,780. However, salaries rose significantly. In 2002, Florida art directors averaged $58,860. In 2010, the average salary was $70,500.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line883
|
__label__wiki
| 0.903224
| 0.903224
|
As Washington reels, U.S. foes see opportunity in the chaos of Trump-stoked riot
LONDON – For America’s opponents, there was no better evidence of the fallibility of Western democracy than the sight of the smoke-covered US Capitol, besieged by a mob, flogged by its involuntarily departing president.
China, Iran and Russia have already referred to the turmoil in Washington as evidence that the much-vaunted US system of government is fundamentally flawed and full of hypocrisy.
There are also major concerns across Europe. Not only because of the division and instability that is rocking its powerful transatlantic ally, but also because of the importance it has to its relationship with Washington after President-elect Joe Biden was inaugurated in two weeks.
Many wonder how the US can ever again teach other countries about democratic values or how it can tell other countries that they are not internally stable enough to have nuclear weapons.
Protesters enter the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday.Win McNamee / Getty Images
“You are now seeing the situation in the US,” Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in a live televised address on Friday. “This is their democracy and their human rights, this is their election scandal, these are their values. These values are mocked by the whole world. Even their friends laugh at them.”
While Iran criticized, its government in Tehran has restricted the rights of its people to freedom of expression and assembly, and its security forces have used deadly force to quell protests, kill hundreds of people and arbitrarily arrest thousands more, according to Amnesty International in London .
Officials in China and Russia asked why US lawmakers in other parts of the world have been so quick to support pro-democracy protesters while rioting rages on their own streets.
“You may all remember the words some US officials, lawmakers and some media outlets used about Hong Kong at the time,” Chinese State Department spokesman Hua Chunying said at a briefing Thursday. “What are you saying now about the United States?”
Hong Kong police arrested more than 50 pro-democracy people on Wednesday for allegedly violating the tough new national security law. Antony Blinken, Biden’s candidate for the office of foreign minister, said on Twitter this week that the new government would “stand with the people of Hong Kong and Beijing’s crackdown on democracy.”
Download the NBC News App for breaking news and politics
In Russia, Leonid Slutsky, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Lower House of Parliament, told the state media that “the boomerang of the” color revolutions, “as we can see, is returning to the United States,” referring to the wave of downturns West advocated democratic uprisings in the former Soviet republics in the 2000s.
Many people have pointed out that many of the demonstrators – in the former Soviet republics and in Hong Kong – are campaigning for more democratic rights. According to observers, the rights of regular Russians were severely undermined under President Vladimir Putin.
However, the mob in the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday attempted to overthrow a legitimate election.
The distinction has not stopped America’s critics from making a living comparison.
“This is an absolute gift for authoritarian leaders whose main narrative is that democratic systems are weak and unstable,” said Matthew Harries, senior research fellow in Berlin at the Royal United Services Institute, a think tank.
“Someone like Xi Jinping can say, see, these people can’t get a grip on Covid-19 and they can’t even protect their legislature,” he said, referring to China’s leaders while talking to the Chinese Communist Party “that to get.” Stability and growth. “
House spokeswoman Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Reiterated that sentiment Thursday, calling Trump “a complete tool for Putin” and saying the president gave the Russian president “the greatest of his many gifts” by delivering the Uprising in the Capitol.
A flag reading “Treason” early Thursday after protesters stormed the US Capitol.Andrew Harnik / AP
Victor Gao, who acted as interpreter for China’s late Supreme Leader Deng Xiaoping, said the Washington scenes are a vivid response for those looking to transplant American political values elsewhere.
“Our system has its own problems, but this system for China has worked for China for 45 years,” he said of the one-party state. “China will never accept an attempt by the United States to impose its system on China because it doesn’t work” for China.
Although President Donald Trump has spoken warmly about Xi, he has also imposed tariffs and sanctions on China for restricting Hong Kong’s autonomy and its human rights violations against the Uyghur Muslims, both of whom are contesting in Beijing.
Perhaps the most notable recent attempt to export American-style democracy has been in Iraq, with institution building being one of the stated goals of the US-led invasion in 2003. Following Wednesday’s events, a meme in circulation showed that Iraqi tanks launched an invasion. “Bringing Democracy Back to the United States.”
“It’s been 20 years since George W. Bush tried to export American democracy as a model to the rest of the world, and today that model is in deep crisis,” said Giovanni Orsina, director of the School of Government Luiss Guido Carli University in Rome.
“From what we’ve seen, the idea that Americans can teach democracy to the rest of the world is much weaker,” he said. “And what makes matters worse is the fact that there are no big alternative democracies. So the crisis in America reflects a crisis of democracy in the world.”
The front pages of the Italian newspapers Thursday. Andrew Medichini / AP
The feeling of a common crisis became clear in the alarms from several European heads of state and government. The US is far from the only country grappling with its populist law fueled by online disinformation theories.
“Inflammatory words become violent acts – on the steps of the Reichstag and now in the Capitol,” tweeted Federal Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, referring to an attempt by anti-coronavirus lockdown demonstrators to storm the German Bundestag in August. “The contempt for democratic institutions is devastating.”
After a couple of years of bruised Trump, few European leaders have joked that Biden’s victory means they can go back to what they were before. For example, French President Emmanuel Macron is taking steps to be less dependent on Washington militarily.
Yet events this week in Washington have put the future of their relationship with the United States at the center.
Speaking in Paris, François Heisbourg, Senior Advisor for Europe at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said: “The outside world has to assume that there is an uncertainty, a great deal of instability, where the US will be in the next few years.”
European powers “must assume that the fate of the US is uncertain,” he said. “And if that is the case, we must prepare for a world in which the US is not the partner we used to have.”
Alexander Smith reported from London; Saphora Smith of Bristol, England; Claudio Lavanga from Rome; Nancy Ing from Paris; Andy Eckardt from Mainz; Tatyana Chistikova from Moscow; and Dawn Liu from Beijing.
Categories World News Tags Chaos, foes, opportunity, reels, riot, Trumpstoked, Washington
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line887
|
__label__wiki
| 0.530735
| 0.530735
|
Title: Direct Action
Subtitle: An Ethnography
Author: David Graeber
Topics: anthropology, anti-globalization, direct action
An Ethnography
SOME WORDS OF HISTORICAL CONTEXT
THE MOMENTARY SUSPENSION OF HISTORY
THEN HISTORY BEGAN AGAIN
A FEW ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
INTRODUCTION: YOU BEGIN WITH RAGE, YOU MOVE ON TO SILLY FANTASIES ...
STRUCTURE OF THE BOOK
CHAPTER 1: NEW YORK DIARY: MARCH 2001
Thursday, March 1, 2001: Ya Basta! formation training, Manhattan, 7PM
Saturday, March 3: Meeting with Mohawks
Sunday, March 4: DAN meeting, Charas El Bohio Cultural Center, 6PM
EDUCATIONAL SESSION
Tuesday, March 6: FTAA Coalition meeting, 8PM
Thursday, March 8: Ya Basta! meeting, Manhattan, 7PM[5]
Friday, March 9: Coalition structure meeting at Amsterdam Pizza at 111th Street, 6:30PM
Meeting with Starhawk, 8PM
Tuesday, March 13: AUTODAWG meeting at the National Lawyer’s Guild, 8PM
YABBA formation in Betty’s studio, 7PM
Sunday, March 18: DAN meeting at Charas
CHAPTER 2: A TRIP TO QUÉBEC CITY
We Arrive
CONSULTA DAY 1
The Table Outside
The Room Inside
12:10PM, First Breakout Session
1:45PM, Back to the Plenary
4:30PM, Breakout Session
8:00PM, Scanner Party
CONSULTA DAY 2:
11:00AM, Plenary Meeting
1:15PM, Final Investigations
CHAPTER 3: FROM BURLINGTON TO AKWESASNE
Thursday, March 29, 2001: Ya Basta! meeting, Brooklyn
Friday, March 30: Independent Media Center, Manhattan
DAN Meeting, Charas El Bohio
Ya Basta! Meeting at Aladdin’s Place in Chelsea, 6 PM
Sunday, April 8: DAN Meeting, Charas El Bohio, 6 PM
Thursday, April 12: Ya Basta! Meeting, Manhattan
The Burlington Spokes
Later That Night
Akwesasne Itself
Border Action Manqué
CHAPTER 4: SUMMIT OF THE AMERICAS, QUÉBEC CITY
5:30AM, We Arrive
11:00AM, Convergence, Laval University
1:30PM, The Carnival Against Capitalism March Begins
5:40PM, I Descend to Get Coffee on the Côte D’Abraham
6:30PM, Back to Ground Zero
6:55PM, Avenue Turnbull
7:27PM, Along St. Jean
8:07PM, Stupid Little Spokes
11:00AM, Orsainville
3:20PM, Finally Back in the City
3:35PM, Ground Zero
4:00PM, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
4:20PM, Jean Baptiste
Notebook Entry, written the next day, 4/22/01
5:25PM, The Park
7:15PM, I enter the IMC
7:30PM, still in the IMC
(From notebook, 4/21/01, 7:50PM, emergency meeting, Québec IMC)
(From my notes again)
8:50PM, Outside
10:45PM, Côte D’Abraham
6:25PM, Bus to Montréal
CHAPTER 5: DIRECT ACTION, ANARCHISM, DIRECT DEMOCRACY
I) WHAT IS DIRECT ACTION?
II) WHAT IS ANARCHISM?
III) VIOLENCE AND NONVIOLENCE
IV) AN EXTREMELY BRIEF HISTORY OF THE RELATION BETWEEN DIRECT ACTION AND DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN THE US SINCE 1960
CHAPTER 6: SOME NOTES ON “ACTIVIST CULTURE”
DILEMMAS OF WHITE PRIVILEGE
DILEMMAS OF PRIVILEGE THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY RACIAL
THE MYTH OF TRUST FUNDS
SO: WHO ARE ACTIVISTS REALLY?
I) Work and Education
II) Class Backgrounds and Trajectories
ART AND ALIENATION
STYLES OF BOHEMIANISM
RANDOM OBSERVATIONS ON ACTIVIST CULTURE
Notebook extracts: June 2000, with some later jotted additions
Frailty:
Notebook extract, July 2000
Cigarettes:
Other drugs:
ACTIVIST LANDSCAPES
A book this size is unusual nowadays. It was certainly not my initial plan. When I first decided to begin writing up some of my experiences of direct action from an ethnographic perspective, I actually had intended to write a fairly short book. But the more I wrote, the more the topic seemed to grow. I realized I was faced with a common dilemma of ethnographic writing: points that seem simple and obvious to anyone who has spent years inside a given cultural universe require a great deal of ink to convey to someone who hasn’t. Something similar had happened to me when I returned to Chicago from my dissertation research in Madagascar, many years ago. I remember fretting over just how much I had to say. I felt I had at best two or three really interesting points to make about the community I’d been studying. Then the moment I started writing, I realized that to explain any one of those points to someone who was not themselves from a rural Malagasy community would require several hundred pages. By the time I was done writing, I also realized that most readers would probably find the exposition much more interesting, all in all, than whatever I originally thought was the “point.”
Call this book, then, a tribute to the continued relevance of ethnographic writing. By “ethnographic writing,” I mean the kind that aims to describe the contours of a social and conceptual universe in a way that is at once theoretically informed, but not, in itself, simply designed to advocate a single argument or theory. There was a time when the detailed description of a political or ceremonial or exchange system in Africa or Amazonia was considered a valuable contribution to human knowledge in itself. This is no longer really the case. An anthropologist actually from Africa or Amazonia, or even some parts of Europe, might still be able to get away with writing such a book. Presently, the academic convention in America (which a young scholar would be unwise to ignore) is that one must pretend one’s description is really meant to make some larger point. This seems unfortunate to me. For one thing, I think it limits a book’s potential to endure over time. Classic ethnographies, after all, can be reinterpreted. New ones—however fascinating—rarely present enough material to allow this; and what there is tends to be strictly organized around a specific argument or related series of them.
Therefore, let me warn the reader immediately: there is no particular argument to this book—unless it’s, that the movement described within is well worth thinking about. This does not mean it does not contain theoretical arguments. Over the course of it, I make any number of them: whether about the ideological role of large heavy objects, the political implications of the word “opinion,” the similarity of writing news stories and Homeric epic composition, or the cosmological role of the police in American culture. What makes this an ethnographic work in the classic sense of the term is that, as Franz Boas once put it, the general is in the service of the particular—aside, perhaps, from the final reflections. Theory is invoked largely to aid in the ultimate task of description. Anarchists and direct action campaigns do not exist to allow some academic to make a theoretical point or prove some rival’s theory wrong (any more than do Balinese trance rituals or Andean irrigation technologies), and it strikes me as obnoxious to suggest otherwise. I would like to think that, as a result, the interest of this book might also endure not only for those motivated by historical curiosity, who wish to understand what it was actually like to have been in the middle of these events, but to ask the same sort of questions the actors in it were raising, about the nature of democracy, autonomy, and possibilities—or for that matter, dilemmas, limitations—of strategies of transformative political action.
Enough time has passed since the breathless days of 2000 and 2001 that one can begin, perhaps, to see that historical moment in a little bit of perspective. That period, it is now clear, marked a certain watershed for global neoliberalism. These were the years in which the “Washington Consensus” of the 1990s was shattered. It happened very quickly. In fact it is a testimony to the effectiveness of direct action that it took only about three years of large-scale popular mobilizations in order to do so.
It is sometimes hard to remember, nowadays, just what the days of the Washington Consensus were like. Perhaps it might be best to start then with a word of context, to help understand why it was that the Zapatista rebellion in 1994 served as such a catalyst for the global movement against neoliberalism that followed, and why that movement came to take the form it did.
The years just before the Zapatista rebellion in Chiapas announced itself to the world were probably the most depressing time to be a revolutionary—or even, dedicated to the ideals of the Left—in living memory. It wasn’t the collapse of the Stalinist regimes in Eastern Europe that was depressing; most radicals were glad to see them go. What was depressing was what happened afterwards. With Stalinism dead, most Marxists expected to see a renaissance of more humane forms of Marxism. Social democrats believed that they had finally won the argument with the revolutionary Left and expected to shepherd the former subjects of the Soviet bloc into their fold; a reasonable expectation, since when polled, most of the population of Central and Eastern Europe said they wanted to model their new economies on Sweden. Instead, they got shock therapy and the most savage form of unrestricted capitalism. In almost every way, the world seemed to be heading for a nightmare scenario. The romantic image of the guerilla insurrectionary, which captured so many imaginations in the 1960s, was cascading into a kind of obscene self-parody. Already in the 1980s, the Right, which had been arguing for years that guerilla insurgencies in places like Vietnam, or Zimbabwe, or El Salvador were not spontaneous but fiendish schemes created by foreign ideologues, began to put their own theories into practice, with the US and South African intelligence agencies creating guerilla armies like the contras or RENAMO to sic on leftist regimes. At the same time, existing Marxist guerilla movements from Columbia to Angola that had begun full of high-minded rhetoric were increasingly prone to become pure bandit kings, or nihilistic armies without any cause beyond their own rebellion (those which held to the old ideal of social transformation, like the Shining Path in Peru, seemed if anything even worse). Liberation movements everywhere were transforming into vicious ethnic wars. Then came the wave of genocide, of which Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia were only the most dramatic and visible.
On a dozen interlocking registers simultaneously, the emerging pattern seemed catastrophic. It seemed like it would go something like this: On an international level, capitalism was transforming itself into a revolutionary force. Abandoning the welfare-state version of capitalism that had actually won the Cold War, the old Cold Warriors and their corporate sponsors were demanding a pure, no-holds-barred, free-market version that had never actually existed, and were willing to wreak havoc on all existing institutional social arrangements in order to achieve it. All this involved a kind of weird inversion. The standard right-wing line, since at least the 1790s, had always been that revolutionary dreams were dangerous precisely because they were utopian: they ignored the real complexity of social life, tradition, authority, and human nature, and dreamed of reshaping the world according to some abstract ideal. By the 1990s, the places had been completely reversed. The Left had largely abandoned utopianism (and the more it did so, the more it shriveled and collapsed), and even as they did so, the Right picked it up. Free-market “reformers” overnight began declaring themselves revolutionaries—the problem was, they did so as the worst sorts of Stalinists, essentially telling the world’s poor that science had proved there was only one way to go forward in history, that this was understood by a scientifically trained elite, and that, therefore, they had to shut up and do as they were told because, even though their prescriptions might cause enormous suffering, death, and dislocation in the present, at some point in the future (they were not sure quite when) it would all lead to a paradise of peace and prosperity. The fact that the “science” itself had shifted from historical materialism to free-market economics was a fairly minor detail; anyway, it makes it easier to explain how former Stalinists from Romania to Vietnam found it so easy to simply switch hats and declare themselves neoliberals. Meanwhile, as structural adjustment policies stripped away what small social protections had existed for the poorest inhabitants of the planet, propaganda and statistical manipulation had become so effective that most mainstream Americans who paid attention to such matters were convinced that conditions for the world’s poorest were actually improving, and not just in areas like East Asia that had mostly refused to adopt neoliberal policies.
Every progressive victory seemed to have been threatened or reversed. In South Africa, generations of struggle had finally eliminated racial apartheid; a moment of happiness, certainly, but an almost identical system was being created on a global scale, based on increasingly militarized borders, and on a labor migration regime where, for those trapped in poor countries, residence in rich, largely white countries was dependent on possession of identity papers and willingness to work in jobs the residents themselves weren’t willing to do. Feminism was being retrenched. Former victories over sweatshop labor, child labor, even chattel slavery, were all being eroded or downright eradicated.
Much of the problem stemmed precisely from the rout of the dream of social revolution, and those utopian fantasies that had always been necessary to inspire people to the passion and self-sacrifice required to actually work to transform the world in the direction of greater freedom and greater equality. I am referring here to genuine, living utopianism—the idea that radical alternatives are possible and that one can begin to create them in the present—as opposed to what might be called “scientific utopianism”: the idea that the revolutionary is the agent of the inevitable march of history, which was so easily, and catastrophically, appropriated by the Right. The murder of dreams could only lead to nightmares. It made it almost impossible to form a center from which to fight the incursions of the (now super-charged, revolutionary) Right. Social Democratic parties in Europe, for example, which were born from a reformist strain of Marxism, first seemed rather pleased with the collapse of their revolutionary cousins—they had finally won the argument—until they realized that their own appeal, and the willingness of capitalists to engage with them, was almost entirely based on their ability to position themselves as the less threatening alternative. Before long, the social democratic regimes had experienced such a moral and political collapse that the few still in power were reduced to becoming the agents for the dismantling of the welfare states they had originally created. The activist Left in industrialized countries was becoming increasingly reactionary, capable of mobilizing passions only to defend things that already existed—the ozone layer, affirmative action programs, trees—and increasingly ineffectively. Elsewhere, it seemed in neartotal collapse.
Then, finally, there was “globalization.”
As Anna Tsing (2002) has recently reminded us, there’s a curious history here. The notion really began as a progressive one. It was a stronger version of internationalism: the sense not only that all men are brothers but that we are the common custodians of a single, fragile planet—an idea encapsulated by photographs of the earth taken from outer space by astronauts in the 1960s. The 1990s rhetoric of globalization had none of this. Essentially, it had two legs: one was that telecommunications—and particularly the Internet—were annihilating distance and making instant contact possible between any part of the planet; the other was that the fall of the Iron Curtain and other barriers to trade were, at the same time, creating a single, unified global market, whose financial mechanisms could then operate through these same instantaneous electronic means. Mainly, it was just about the power of finance capital. But the rhetoric was usually accompanied by a series of very broad generalizations: that not only money but products, ideas, and people were “flowing” about as never before, national economies could no longer dream of being autonomous; old nationalist ideologies, indeed, national borders, were becoming increasingly irrelevant, and so on. All of this was presented as happening all of its own accord. Technologies advanced, people were increasingly in contact with one another: the only possible language for them to deal with one another was trade—since capitalism was, after all, rooted in human nature.
For anyone who was really paying attention, of course, the reality was very different. Borders were not being effaced, but reinforced. Poor populations were still penned into their countries of origin (in which existing social benefits were being rapidly withdrawn). “Globalization” merely referred to the ability of finance capital to skip around as it wished and take advantage of that fact. Most of all, however, the period of “globalization”—or neoliberalism, as it came to be known just about everywhere except America—saw the creation of the first genuinely planetary bureaucratic system in human history.
In retrospect, I very much imagine that this is how the last years of the twentieth century will be seen. The UN had of course existed since mid-century, but the UN had never had more than moral authority. What was being patched together now was a system with teeth. At the top were the financiers—bankers, currency traders, hedge-fund operators, and the like—all connected electronically. There were the gigantic bureaucratically-organized transnationals that during this period were absorbing and consolidating literally millions of formerly independent enterprises. There were the global trade bureaucrats—International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, World Trade Organization (WTO), and so on, but also including institutions like the US Federal Reserve, treaty organizations like the European Union (EU) or North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)—whose chief role seemed to be to protect the interests of the first two. And, finally, there were the various tiers of NGOs, whose role, from providing farm credits to inoculating infants or providing food during famines, increasingly came to be to provide services that states had once been expected to supply, but had effectively now been forbidden from doing by the IMF. The remarkable thing was that this was achieved through an ideology of radical individualism: above all, a broad rejection of the claims of common community—and political community in particular. We were all to be rational individuals on the market, aiming to acquire goods. Insofar as we were different, it was to be a matter of personal self-realization through consumption, since consumption, in turn, was assumed to be largely about the creation and expression of identities. Then, of course, identity could be said to circle back: since all political and economic questions were assumed to be effectively settled (history, in this respect, was over) identity politics became about the only politics that could be considered legitimate.
All this makes it easy to see why the Zapatista rebellion—which began January 1, 1994, the day in which the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) went into effect—marked such a turning point. The Zapatistas, with their rejection of the old-fashioned guerilla strategy of seizing state control through armed struggle, with their call instead for the creation of autonomous, democratic, self-governing communities, in alliance with a global network of like-minded democratic revolutionaries, managed to crystallize, often in beautiful poetic language, all the strains of opposition that had been slowly coalescing in the years before. As members of the Midnight Notes Collective aptly began pointing out even at the time, opposition to IMF-imposed structural adjustment policies, (whether it took the form of Latin American indigenous rights campaigns, African food riots, or Indonesian Islamist movements) almost invariably was based on the moral defense of some collective resource: the right to treat land, or food, or fossil fuels, or even culture, not as a marketable commodity but as a common good collectively administered by some form of moral community—even if in fewer and fewer cases was the nation-state seen as the proper guardian of such rights or the framework of the moral community in question. Almost always, their sights were set both more locally and on a planetary scale. The Zapatistas, with their deft ability to employ emerging global communication technologies to mobilize international networks to defend their own autonomous enclaves in the Lacandon Rain Forest, were not only the perfect symbol, they managed to articulate what was happening through a new approach to the very idea of revolution.
In turn, it was the Zapatistas who began, with their two international encuentros “For Humanity and Against Neoliberalism,” to lay the foundation for what came to be known as the “anti-globalization” movement. Now this term, as I have said many times before, is something of a misnomer. It was basically an invention of the media. The most dynamic and important elements in the movement always saw it as aiming for a genuine, democratic form of globalization; at the very least a return to the sort of planetary consciousness from which the term first emerged. In the case of anarchists, autonomists, and other such radical elements, it meant the effacement of all international borders entirely. What emerged from the Zapatista encuentros was a loosely organized planetary network called Peoples’ Global Action (PGA), one of whose aims was to put nonviolent direct action back on the world stage as a force for global revolution. PGA was significant above all in that it explicitly rejected the participation of political parties or any group whose purpose was to become a government. It was PGA, in turn, that put out the first “calls to action” that eventually culminated in the November 1999 actions in Seattle. Rather than trying to narrative the story myself—it will be told many times, in different ways, over the course of the book—let me instead provide the reader with a time line of only the most important events. What follows is a bare-bones account, and it reflects a very North American perspective, but readers may find it useful to consult, now and again, while reading this work:
January 1, 1994. North American Free Trade Agreement goes into effect. Uprising by the EZLN (or Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional, or Zapatistas) in Chiapas begins with a surprise military offensive that leads, briefly, to the seizure of Chiapas’ capital, San Christobal de las Casas. The Zapatistas, however, quickly transform from an offensive force to a defensive one, creating a series of self-governing autonomous communities, seeking international allies, and promulgating a politics of direct action, democratic experimentation, and a new approach to revolution that converges with the anarchist tradition in its refusal of traditional attempts to transform through the seizure of state power.
August, 1997. Second Zapatista “International Encuentro For Humanity and Against Neoliberalism” in Spain ends with a call to create an international network, that ultimately comes to be known (in English) as Peoples’ Global Action. Aside from the Zapatistas themselves, the core of PGA, at first, consists of the Brazilian Landless Farmers’ Movement (MST), the Indian Karnataka State Farmers’ Association (KRRS, a mass-based Gandhian direct action movement), anarchist or anarchist-inspired groups including Ya Basta! in Italy and Reclaim the Streets in the UK, and various indigenous and agrarian movements and radical labor unions.
June 18, 1999. “J18,” the first massive PGA-sponsored global day of action, known alternately as the “Global Day of Action Against Financial Centers” or “Carnival Against Capitalism” to coincide with the G8 meetings of leaders of the major industrial powers, with coordinated actions in over a hundred cities worldwide from Australia to Zimbabwe. In America, several demos are organized, mostly under the banner of new American versions of Reclaim the Streets.
November 30, 1999. “N30” actions against the WTO ministerial meetings in Seattle, another international day of action proposed by PGA. The action is long in the planning but comes as a total surprise to the mainstream media, who see it as the birth of a movement. Seattle saw sharp divisions over tactics between nonviolent protesters conducting the lockdowns and blockades of the hotel where the ministerial is taking place, organized by the newly created Direct Action Network (DAN), and participants in a smaller “Black Bloc,” mostly made up of anarchists and radical ecologists, who have a more militant interpretation of nonviolence, and who, after police begin to attack the blockaders, start a campaign of targeted property destruction against symbols of corporate power (mostly windows) downtown. On the first day, the meetings are actually shut down, and negotiations end in failure. The next few days see massive repression, culminating in the declaration of martial law and the summoning of the National Guard. The months immediately following Seattle are filled with a burst of new organizing and activity, and the creation of autonomous chapters of DAN in cities across the US, and even Canada.
April 16, 2000. “A16” actions against the meetings of the World Bank and IMF in Washington DC. While not as tactically successful as Seattle (the meetings are not shut down), A16 marks the beginning of a rapprochement between the DAN organizers and the autonomous Revolutionary Anti-Capitalist Bloc—the Black Bloc assembled for the occasion—with the RACB refraining from property destruction and instead providing support for blockaders and those in lockdown.
August 1, 2000. “R2K” actions against the Republican Convention in Philadelphia. Combined with D2K actions against the Democratic Convention in Los Angeles, these are collectively known among activists as R2D2. While LA DAN rejects widespread direct action for a strategy of marches in alliance with community groups, the Philly actions, organized above all by DANs in New York, Philly, and DC, mark further integration of Black Blocs and blockaders, with the “Revolutionary Anti-Authoritarian Bloc” in this case providing a diversion to draw police away from the lockdowns. Philly is also marked by an attempt to create alliances between the mostly white DANs and radical people of color organizations, with mixed success. Retrospectively, it is seen as the point where the lockdown/blockade strategy has largely run its course, prompting an interest in creating more mobile tactics.
September 26, 2000. “S26” actions against the IMF/World Bank meetings in Prague, Czech Republic. This is the first large and dramatic action in Europe after Seattle. Like many European actions, the level of militancy is much greater than in the US. The actions see fierce clashes between Black Bloc anarchists and police, the first appearance of the festive “Pink Bloc,” and the first international debut of the Italian “white overalls” tactics (the “Tute Bianche,” organized by Italian Ya Basta!), a kind of comic mock army of activists in helmets, padding, shields, and often inflatable inner-tubes, who attempt to storm police lines armed, among other things, with balloons and water pistols.
January 20, 2001. “J20” protests at Bush’s inauguration, the second largest inaugural protests in American history, though they receive almost no attention from the mainstream media. Most members of NYC DAN end up joining another Revolutionary Anti-Authoritarian Bloc. The Black Bloc manages to crash through police barricades and temporarily occupy Naval Memorial, hoisting a black flag and blocking the parade route, and Bush’s motorcade, for some time before finally being forced out by secret service and police.
January 25–30, 2001. The first World Social Forum (WSF) is held in Porto Alegre, Brazil. Originally conceived as the radical alternative to the World Economic Forum (WEF)—a kind of junket and networking session for global officials and bureaucrats, usually held in Davos, Switzerland—the WSF rapidly becomes the intellectual center of the global movement against neoliberalism, with thousands of different organizations and individuals participating in hundreds of sessions.
April 20–22, 2001. Actions against the “Summit of the Americas,” negotiations over the Free Trade Area of the Americas pact (FTAA) in Québec City, Canada. This is the first action where the authorities organize their strategy around building a large fence (“the wall”) around the section of the city where the summit is to take place. The actions, organized primarily by the Montréal-based Convergence des Luttes Anti-Capitalistes, or CLAC, mainly aim attacks at the wall itself, as a symbol of the contradictions of neoliberalism.
July 19–21, 2001. Several hundred thousand protesters converge on Genoa, Italy, for the G8 meetings of the heads of industrialized nations. The wall strategy is again employed, and Italian police, who had traditionally been relatively tolerant of white overall tactics, adopt a strategy of extreme repression this time, refusing any contact with protest leaders and employing a systematic strategy of encouraging fascists and agent provocateurs to provide excuses to attack, arrest, and afterwards, systematically abuse and even torture activists. Genoa is seen as a watermark of repression in Europe and causes European groups to scramble to formulate a new strategy.
September 11, 2001. Attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center. Anarchists in New York are among the first to mobilize against the upcoming war, with marches culminating in a march of six thousand people to Times Square a month after the event. These are almost completely ignored in the mainstream media. Actions being planned for the upcoming World Bank/ IMF meetings in Washington DC are radically scaled back as the movement is forced to reconsider its overall strategic direction.
February 3–4, 2002. World Economic Forum protests in New York City. In the immediate wake of 911, the WEF announces it will relocate, this year, from Davos (where it has become the object of frequent activist sieges) to the Waldorf Astoria in New York “as an act of solidarity.” Anarchists in NYC DAN and the newly created NYC Anti-Capitalist Convergence (ACC) are forced to throw together an action in a matter of months, abandoned by almost all of their usual NGO and Labor allies. The action is successfully and nonviolently pulled off, but is met by massive police intimidation and hundreds of arrests. The stress of 911, and of being forced to create a national mobilization out of nothing in such a short time, creates endless tensions within the New York scene and eventually leads to decline and eventual dissolution of DAN over the course of the next year.
September 10–14, 2003. WTO Ministerial in Cancún, Mexico. Mass actions by Mexican and global activists—including the dramatic suicide of a South Korean farmer—end in a definitive check of the WTO process.
November 17–21 2003. FTAA negotiations in Miami, met by the first genuinely large-scale national convergence in the US since 911. These meetings also see the first use, in the US, of a new policy of massive preemptive attacks and extreme police violence against protesters—an approach that comes to be known as the “Miami model” after Homeland Security announces it as the way to deal with such actions in the future. The free trade negotiations, on the other hand, come to nothing, marking the definitive end of the FTAA process.
I’ll end here, not because Miami represents the end of anything (though some have argued it marks the end of one cycle of at least the North American movement), but rather, because it marks the end of the period covered in this book. September 11 and the “War on Terror” did certainly create a dramatically new climate in the United States, but its effects elsewhere were less profound, and certainly less enduring. In other parts of the world, repression was never so severe, and most managed to avoid the wave of xenophobia and militarist nationalism that did so much damage in the US. In many ways, the movement began to go into a new and broader stage, particularly in Latin America, with the wave of factory occupations and local assemblies in Argentina, or one-time PGA conveners like Evo Morales actually coming to power in Bolivia, events in Atenco, Oaxaca, and other parts of Mexico itself. I do not want to generalize or make predictions: at moments of genuine change, history makes fools of all of us who try. But I will at least repeat what I have said before (e.g. Graeber 2002; Graeber and Grubacic 2004): that anarchism, as a political philosophy, and anarchist ideas and imperatives, have become more and more important everywhere in the world. There is a broad realization that the age of revolutions is by no means over, but that revolution will, in the twenty-first century, take on increasingly unfamiliar forms. First and foremost, I would hope this book will serve as a resource for those who wish to think about expanding their sense of political possibilities, for anyone curious about what new directions radical thought and action might take.
It is very difficult to write acknowledgments for a book like this. One does not wish to single out anyone for fear of suggesting that someone else is less deserving. But I can start by acknowledging the love and support of my friends and family, and my supporters at Yale during the unfortunate events that transpired, to some degree, as a result of the very research on which this book is based. The period during which I was conducting research, and then writing, this book was one of almost continual stress and personal tragedy: marked by the prolonged illness and eventual death of both my brother and my mother, all against the backdrop of having to deal with endless, bizarre campaigns by those elements of the senior faculty at Yale apparently determined to drive me out by any means necessary. I will not enter into details, but I would like to thank, first of all, my colleagues at Yale who provided the support and sense of community that made the place livable for me: Jennifer Bair, Bernard Bate, Richard Burger, Kamari Clarke, Hal Conklin, Michael Denning, Saroja Dorairajoo, Ilana Gershon, Paul Gilroy, Thomas Blum Hansen, Natalie Jerimijenko, Bun Lai, Enrique Mayer, Sam Messer, Marilda Menezes, John Middleton, Karen Phillips, Dhooleka Raj, Iman Saca, Lidia Santos, Jim Scott, Mary Smith, John Szwed, Thomas Tartaron, Frederic Vandenberge, Immanuel Wallerstein, David Watts, and Eric Worby, to name a few. Friends and colleagues outside of Yale who gave me help and encouragement in this project are far too numerous to list. I would like to be able, too, to thank by name everyone who pitched in after the department voted to terminate my contract, but it would be impossible. Almost five thousand people signed the petitions Yale students created; several departments (Chicago, Sussex, Glasgow, Manchester) and organizations ranging from the Global Studies Association to the Canadian Union of Postal Workers wrote collective letters to the department demanding an explanation (of course they received none), as did an endless stream of individual scholars. Most of all, I want to thank the students at Yale, and again this list is by no means comprehensive—and heavily weighted towards those I came to know in my last few years at Yale—but they were always my greatest inspiration there: Muhammad Ikraam Abdu-Noor, Ahmed Afzal, Colleen Asper, Ping-Ann Ado, Omolade Adunbi, Nikhil Anand, Caitlin Barrett, Kalanit Baumhauft, Ben Begleiter, Nina Bhatt, Rebecca Bohrman, Sheridan Booker, Devika Bordia, Lisa Allette Brooks, Elizabeth Busbee, Lucia Cantero, David Carston-Knowles, Durba Chattaraj, Linda Chhay, Kate Clancey, Robert Clark, Seth Curley, Anthony Dalton, Amelia Frank-Vitale, Antonios Finitsis, Thomas Frampton, Emily Friedrichs, Ajay Gandhi, Vladimir Gil, Josh Gordon, Jessica Gussberg, Annie Harper, Joseph Hill, Emily Hitch, Jennifer Jackson, Nazima Kadir, Kristin Kajdzik, Csilla Kalocsai, Brenda Kondo, Adrian LeCesne, Moon-Hee Lee, Kat Lo, Molly Margaretten, Andrew Mathews, Madeleine Meek, Christina Moon, Yancey Orr, Simon Moshenberg, Jason Nesbitt, Nana Okura, Juan Orrantia, Jonathan Padwe, Richard Payne, Anne Rademacher, Mieka Ritsema, Elliot Robson, Phoebe Rounds, Arian Schulze, Colin Smith, Olga Sooudi, Sarah Stillman, Will Tanzman, Jordan Treviño, Karen Warner, Kristina Weaver, and Tiantian Zhang.
To name my activist friends provides an even stranger problem: it is very difficult to know who I can actually refer to by their name—that is, those whose legal names I actually know. I’m going to throw out just a few, mainly because I happen to know they wouldn’t mind: Majeed Balavandi, Autumn Brown, Ayca Cubukcu, Crystal Dubois, Mike Duncan, Todd Eaton, Neala Byrne, Beka Economopolos, Stefan Christoff, Shawn Ewald, Heather Gautney, Andrej Grubacic, Harry Halpin, Eric Laursen, Bob Lederer, Brooke Lehman, Yvonne Liu, Daniel McGowan, Michael Menser, Dyan Neary, Ana Nogueira, Priya Reddy, Ramor Ryan, Mac Scott, Danielle Leah Sered, Ben Shepherd, Stephven Shukaitis, Marina Sitrin, John Tarleton, Lesley Julia Wood. Everyone in New York DAN and the ACC; everyone in the IWW and the newly founded SDS; everyone who looked over drafts, or pieces of them, to point out the endless things I got wrong; but, really, anyone whose name appears in this text deserves thanks, and much more. These are the people who gave me a new sense of hope for the planet in what would otherwise have been the worst time of my life. I have nothing but love for them.
Obviously there are a few individuals I must especially single out: Lauren Leve, first and foremost, Eric Graeber, Ruth Graeber, Andrej Grubacic, Nhu Le, and Stuart Rockefeller. I’d like to thank Charles Weigl, my editor, and everyone else at AK Press.
I came into this project with little but myself and my own sense of optimism. I pursued it with the growing understanding that, no matter how bleak and how dangerous some of the places through which one must pass, to live as a rebel—in the constant awareness of the possibilities of revolutionary transformation, and amongst those who dream of it—is surely the best way one can live.
“So,” Jaggi says. “I have an idea for what Ya Basta! might contribute to the actions in Québec City. The Canadian press keeps framing this as some kind of alien invasion. Thousands of American anarchists are going to be invading Canada to disrupt the Summit. The Québécois press is doing the same thing: it’s the English invasion all over again. So my idea is we play with that. We reenact the battle of Québec.”
Puzzled stares from the Americans at the table.
“That was the battle in 1759 in which the British conquered the city in the first place. They surprised the French garrison by climbing up these cliffs just to the west of the Plains of Abraham, near the old fort. So here’s my idea. You guys can suit up in your Ya Basta! outfits, and climb the exact same cliff, except—no, wait, listen! This part is important—over all the padding and the chemical jumpsuits, you’ll all be wearing Québec Nordiques hockey jerseys.”
“You want us to climb a cliff?” asked Moose.
“And how high exactly is this cliff?”
“Oh, I don’t know, 60 meters. What’s that, about 180 feet?”
“So you want us to climb a 180-foot cliff geared up in gloves and helmets and gas masks and foam rubber padding?”—Moose acting as if Jaggi might actually be serious about this.
“Think of it this way: the helmets and padding would be very helpful if you fall down at all. Which is likely because you have to figure the cliffs will be defended.”
Moose: “Oh, great. So now we’re climbing a 180-foot cliff with riot cops all over the top.”
“Oh come on, you’re probably all going to get arrested immediately just for wearing those suits. You might as well actually do something with them first. And the symbolism would be perfect.”
“I refuse to be so pessimistic,” I say. “Let’s imagine some of us get through. We scale the cliffs. Suddenly we’re inside the security perimeter…”
“Well, actually, no,” says Jaggi, looking down at the map of the city. The map of the city is drawn in felt tip on a large unfolded napkin, on the table of a pastry shop in New York City’s Little Italy, surrounded by various salt shakers and sugar bowls being used to represent imaginary activist and police units, all flanked by empty bottles of beer and a former chocolate cake. Six activists are crowded around the table, three Canadians, three representatives of the New York Ya Basta! Collective—all that are left of what had started as a much larger group. “We’re kind of assuming the fence will actually run around the edge of the cliff as well.”
Jaggi confers briefly with his two Québécois friends, who nod agreement. One, Nicole, adds another line to the map to make this more explicit.
“You mean we get over the cliffs and we still have to go over the wall?” someone asks.
“Oh come on,” says Jaggi. “If you can get up a 180-foot cliff, a 15-foot chain-link fence is going to be a problem?”
“Fine, we’re inside.” I’m insisting on my scenario. “Fifty activists in yellow chemical jumpsuits and—what was it, some Québec team’s hockey jerseys?—make it over the wall. We are inside the security perimeter. We have reversed the British invasion. Now what do we do? Occupy the citadel? Present a petition?”
“Actually, that would be really funny,” says one of the Yabbas. “We fight our way up the cliffs past two thousand riot cops, we go over the wall, and then, when we get there, we just present a petition.”
“To who?”
“Well to Bush, obviously.”
“How do we know where Bush is going to be?” asks someone else.
“He will be staying in the Concord hotel,” says one of the Québécois anarchists. “It will be easy to find; you can see it from almost anywhere in the city. Especially easy now,” he smiles. “Just look for the building with the surface-to-air missiles on top.”
“Plus about ten thousand snipers and secret service men, presumably, with endless high tech surveillance equipment…”
“…which will, in turn, be disrupted by our vast fleet of remote-controlled model airplanes…”
Conversation had, in fact, been seriously degenerating for at least half an hour.
It had started out seriously enough, as one of those three-hour marathon conversations about everything. The Canadians were in town as part of a traveling activist tour, put together by the CLAC, a Montréal-based anarchist group whose French acronym stood for Convergence des Luttes Anti-Capitalistes, or “Convergence of Anti-Capitalist Struggles.” It was early March 2001. They were touring to mobilize against the Summit of the Americas due to be held in Québec City on April 20, to be attended by every head of state in the Western Hemisphere (except Cuba). This event was to see the signing of a preliminary draft of something called the Free Trade Area of the Americas Act, an attempt, essentially, to extend NAFTA to the entire hemisphere. These efforts, spearheaded by the United States, were, in fact, ultimately foiled, and the people in that pastry shop, unlikely though it may seem, played a significant role in foiling them. But this is a bit of a different story and anyway I’m jumping ahead. At any rate, the conversation started out in a Lower East Side Mexican restaurant called Tres Aztecas, where several activists from the New York City Direct Action Network took the visitors—Jaggi from Montréal and a quieter, francophone couple from Québec City itself—out to dinner. Actually, two of the NYC DAN people were themselves Canadians: a couple named Mac and Lesley, originally from Toronto, currently living in New York. She was a sociology student at Columbia, he currently employed as a house painter and volunteer for the National Lawyers Guild. Most of the others were also part of the NYC Ya Basta! collective. This was a newly created group inspired by a group of the same name in Italy, whose name, however was derived from a slogan (it means “Enough Already!”) made famous by the Zapatista rebels in Chiapas, who had, in turn, begun their insurrection on January 1, 1994, the day that NAFTA first went into effect.
In activist circles that year, Ya Basta! had something of the quality of a Next Big Thing. Probably, this was most of all for their spectacularly innovative tactics: members of the group were famous for covering themselves in all sorts of elaborate padding, made from everything from foam rubber sheeting to rubber ducky flotation devices, combining it with helmets and plastic shields, so one looked like some kind of futuristic Greek hoplite, then topping the whole thing with gas masks and white chemical protective suits. The idea is that, so suited up, there’s relatively little the cops can do that will actually hurt you. Of course, you are rendered so clumsy there’s probably not that much you could do to hurt anyone else; but that’s kind of the point. Its exponents claim the tactic is rooted in a new philosophy of civil disobedience. Where the old-fashioned, masochistic, Gandhian approach encourages activists to hold out their willingness to let the police beat them up as a sign of moral superiority, the “white overalls” proposed an ethos of protection: as long as you refuse to harm others, it is completely legitimate to take whatever measures necessary to avoid harm to yourself. The costume also makes one look rather ridiculous, but that’s kind of the point too. Ya Basta! columns would often play on it by, for instance, attacking police lines with balloons or water pistols. What really impressed a lot of activists in America, though, was that such groups had a real social base. Ya Basta! emerged from Italy’s extremely extensive network of squats and occupied social centers (the “white overalls” began, in effect, as the army of the squats). They also had their own intellectuals: around that time the works of Italian Autonomist thinkers like Toni Negri, Paolo Virno, and Bifo Berardi were just beginning to be translated and disseminated over the Internet and were being picked up by activists across America.
I shouldn’t exaggerate. In the spring of 2001, the vast majority of American anarchists knew next to nothing of Italian theory. Still, there were certain very enthusiastic exceptions. In New York, the most significant among them was a man who went by the name of Moose. A tall, gangly young man who almost always wore a fisherman’s cap, Moose was, by profession, a retoucher of fashion photos. He was also active in NYC DAN. Inspired by what he had read about the movement in Italy after Ya Basta!’s dramatic appearance at the IMF protests in Prague, Moose did a little research and figured out where you could actually buy cheap chemical jumpsuits. He mail-ordered several and started occasionally wearing them to marches. One day, during a police-brutality march, a student from Italy who had actually done some work with Ya Basta! walked up to him and asked what was going on. And, so, New York Ya Basta! was born.
It was, in his conception, simultaneously an embrace of Italian tactics and of some of the broader principles developed by Italian Autonomist Marxism, which emphasized the refusal of work, “exodus” or engaged withdrawal from mainstream institutions, and, critically, freedom of movement across borders. In Italy, “white overalls” had made a series of dramatic actions against immigration detention camps, to highlight the fact much of what was touted as “globalization” actually meant, in practice, opening borders to the movement of money, manufactures, and certain forms of information, while radically increasing the barriers and controls over the movement of human beings. This idea had already struck a chord in North America, where activists were fond of pointing out that the US Border Patrol had actually tripled in size in the years since the signing of NAFTA. A lot of us were already arguing that the whole point of “free trade” was in fact to confine most of the world’s population in impoverished global ghettoes with heavily militarized borders, in which existing social protections could be removed and the resulting terror and desperation fully exploited by global capital. The question was how to bring the two—ideas and tactics—together.
If nothing else, the prospect excited people. The NYC Ya Basta! collective grew rapidly, just as similar collectives (the Wombles in England, the Wombats in Australia) were growing all over the Anglophone world. Much of the first part of the conversation at Tres Aztecas had consisted of Moose talking about Ya Basta!. Later, at the pastry shop (Jaggi’s friend insisted we find one, as he was something of a chocolate addict), the discussion moved on to potential border actions, the state of anarchy in Canada, Ontario’s asshole governor, movement celebrities and why they are annoying, philosophy, anthropology, music—A typical endless activist conversation about everything. Jaggi explained that, as in much of Canada, Québécois anarchists were divided largely between hardcore squatter types and grad students (“like these two—they’ll probably quit the moment the dissertation is finished”)—though there was also a smattering of old-fashioned syndicalist types. No anarchist labor unions per se, but they work within existing unions. The real dramatic growth had been within the globalization movement, where, as in so many places, there was an emerging division of labor between NGOs and big labor groups, which dominated policy discussions, and anarchists, who were quickly coming to dominate the direct action end of things. In Montréal, there were basically two groups organizing actions: CLAC, and something called Operation SalAMI. CLAC isn’t officially anarchist, of course. Officially, it’s just “anti-authoritarian” (well, anti-authoritarian, anti-capitalist, opposed to all forms of racial and gender oppression, dedicated to direct action, and unwilling to negotiate with inherently undemocratic organizations, which in practice means, basically, “anarchist”).
“So, what about SalAMI? They aren’t anarchists?”
“Oh, I’m sure there’s some people in it who consider themselves anarchists of some sort or another.”
“So, what are they then?
Mac interjected, “Oh, you know. The usual anti-corporate types. Not anti-capitalists. They originally came out of the campaign against the Multilateral Agreement on Investment in 1998. At the time, they organized a really good action in Ottawa. But… well, they’re pacifists. I guess that would be the best way to sum it up.”
“Did you see the guidelines they first proposed for the Québec City actions?” asked Jaggi. “Absolute nonviolence. Part of their principles of conduct were no “verbal violence,” no one is allowed to use bad language. No, literally, I’m not making this up. Spray-painting slogans is a form of violence. No wearing of masks or other items of clothing that cover your face…”
The other Canadians were joining in. “Which then gives them the right to micro-manage everything.”
“They’re total control freaks. Marshals, everything.”
“So, I don’t get it,” says one of the Americans. “What kind of process do these guys use?”
“Yeah,” another American asked. “Are they democratic, or do they have a formal leadership structure? Before an action, do they hold spokescouncils?”
“Oh, yeah, yeah, they do all that. Or at least, they do now. When they started out it was totally top-down, with a charismatic leadership, orders from above. Ostensibly, that’s all changed now. But all the key decisions, like the code of conduct, are always already made in the call to action before you even show up to the spokescouncil. So, it’s basically a sham because with marshals to control everything, any kind of self-organization becomes meaningless.”
“Plus,” says Jaggi, “they still do have a sort of charismatic leadership. Which… well, okay. Have you noticed how pacifists always seem to develop a charismatic leadership? Gandhi, King, the Dalai Lama. Something about the pacifist ethos seems to just produce them. When I was at A16 I saw these idiots carrying signs with huge pictures of Gandhi on them, and below it there was some kind of quote from him saying ‘what’s important is not me, but my message.’ So I had to go up to them and ask them, ‘don’t you think there’s a bit of a contradiction here?’”
Discussion ensues on the merits of Gandhi, as opposed to other figures in the Indian Independence movement. The consensus seems to be that he was a highly ambivalent figure. On the one hand, he had a lot of very anarchistic ideals. On the other, he was a weird, sexually twisted patriarch who collaborated with the far-from-revolutionary Congress party and openly fostered a cult of personality around himself. One of the Canadians insisted Gandhi’s pacifism actually delayed independence by a generation. One of the Americans emphasizes that Gandhi did also say that, while nonviolence was an ideal, those who resist oppression violently are morally superior to those who don’t resist at all—a sentiment his more self-righteous Western acolytes always seem to forget.
“What bothers me about the whole concept of pacifism,” says Mac, “is that it’s fundamentally elitist. Poor people—people who have to live every day with violence by police, who are used to it, who expect it… they’re not going to see anything admirable, let alone heroic, in inviting police violence, and then facing it passively.”
I always find such opinions slightly disconcerting, coming from who they are. Mac is one of the most likeable, easygoing, rather self-effacingly silly people I know. I often wonder if he’s even capable of anger. His wife is much the same.
“What do you think?” I ask Lesley.
“Oh, I totally agree. First of all, the whole idea that you’re going to reveal the true coercive nature of the state by showing how they’ll attack you even when you are posing them no physical threat—well, come on. You’re telling poor people something they don’t already know?”
“I worked with OCAP—that’s the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty—for three years in Toronto,” said Mac, “and one thing we found is that if, say, you’re working with homeless people or genuinely oppressed communities, either they’re not going to do anything, or they’re going to want to directly confront the people who’ve been fucking them over. Which is how you get those ‘riots’ like the one last spring in Toronto.” Lesley explains Mac is referring to a march on June 15, 2000, organized by OCAP, in which over a thousand homeless people, along with housing activists, were attacked by riot police when they insisted on the right to address parliament, and ended up in a pitched battle that lasted hours. “After the third cavalry charge against peaceful protesters, everyone just exploded. They started throwing everything in sight, ripping up the sidewalks, street signs, throwing trash cans.”
“Now, wait a minute,” I protest. “Gandhi himself worked with a lot of poor people.”
“True,” Jaggi interjects, “but that’s within a very specific religious tradition. If you’re a Hindu, being able to endure your lowly position within the caste hierarchy, making that a sign of virtue—that’s what it’s all about.”
And so on. The whole conversation seems to me a little pat and one-sided. I point out that, since Seattle, unions had been panicking about the possibility of “violence,” or even just property destruction. Others countered that I was talking about union bureaucrats, not the rank and file. Well, what about the poor people’s groups that critique militant tactics as a product of middle-class white privilege, that real oppressed groups would never be allowed to get away with? Someone changes the subject.
“And have you noticed how the SalAMI types are always carefully keeping track of which politicians or celebrities or rich people approve of them. The whole mind-set is completely elitist.”
Anyway, SalAMI put out their pacifist call to action, and then CLAC put out their own, calling for a “diversity of tactics.” By this they meant, space should be made for art and puppets, space should be made for traditional Gandhian “come-take-me-away” civil disobedience, and space should be made for more militant tactics too. The critical thing is to ensure that, in the end, everyone will stand in solidarity with one another. As it turned out, very few people registered for the SalAMI spokescouncil, so they cancelled it and now were concentrating on doing something in Montréal. CLAC’s spokescouncil on the other hand went well enough that it lead to the creation of a new local group—called CASA, the Summit of the Americas Welcoming Committee. CASA was now doing frenetic local organizing. Teams were going to door to door in working-class neighborhoods near the old fortress. It was a unique opportunity because the Canadian police had recently announced that, come the summit, the old town and the area surrounding the Convention Center where the meetings were to be held was going to be surrounded by a four kilometer-long security fence. Only those with ID cards certifying that they lived within the perimeter would be allowed inside. They kept issuing contradictory statements as to where, exactly, the fence would run, but it would definitely be cutting many neighborhoods in half. Children would have to pass heavily militarized police checkpoints to return home from school. Local people were already referring to it as “the wall.”
One should bear in mind, Jaggi noted, that this is a population that’s, because of its history, already extremely suspicious of the central government. Even Québecois nationalism is a very weird, proletarian kind of nationalism: Frenchspeakers see themselves as the white working class of Eastern Canada, which to some extent, is true. It was at this point—right around the time Mac and Lesley had to leave—that we got into the politics of the wall; about the promised militarization of the Canadian border (during trade talks in Windsor the year before, for instance, two-thirds of the Americans who tried to cross the border were turned away, and a fair number were arrested). The question was how to plan a border action that would draw attention to the hypocrisy of militarizing the border and building walls inside a city in order to be able to shield the political leaders from any danger of contact with their constituents—not to mention the rhetoric of “free trade” knocking down walls and unifying the planet, when, in order to even be able to sign them, one has to do the exact opposite. The rest of us started bouncing around ideas. Possible border actions. Eventually, this started leading to scenario questions, and then, to the cliffs of Québec City. That was toward the end of the conversation, actually—by that point we were all a bit worse for wear, and not long after we broke, went home, and went to sleep.
I’ve started with the conversation at the pastry shop for a number of reasons. For one thing, it’s funny. I thought it might convey something of the sense of a movement that is, as we shall see, particularly prone to forms of action that are simultaneously profoundly foolish and utterly serious. Such a conversation, especially juxtaposed with the serious arguments about Gandhi and so forth, seemed the best way to give the reader an immediate sense of what being involved with such a movement is actually like. Also it makes for a better book.
Such a conversation also immediately raises an issue I’ll be struggling with throughout the book: what does one do with actors’ identities when discussing politically and legally sensitive conversations? New York Ya Basta!, for example, is almost certainly still listed in certain police intelligence systems as a terrorist organization. In the weeks before the summit, both American and Canadian police identified it as one of the principle potentially “violent elements,” and anyone suspected of involvement in Ya Basta! was seized when trying to cross the border, detained for days, and extensively interrogated. All this was ridiculous. Ya Basta!, as I mentioned, was based on a principle of what is sometimes called “radical defense.” Members armored themselves against batons and rubber bullets, but they justified doing so precisely because they refused to do anything that might hurt anyone else. But in this context, the fact that claims are ridiculous is largely irrelevant. Reclaim the Streets New York, a group that specializes in unpermitted street parties, has been classified by certain police task forces as a terrorist group as well.[1] These things never make any sense. One thing one learns quickly as an activist is that the hand of repression is extremely random. As a result, the conversation with which I began, however obviously facetious, could, conceivably, be classified as a terrorist conspiracy.
Imagine, for a moment, that there had been a hidden microphone in the pastry shop. Imagine some policeman or FBI agent monitoring the above conversation. This is not outside the realm of possibility: perhaps they had been expecting some Mafiosi to meet there and plan an actual crime. Next, imagine—a not unlikely possibility—that the policeman listening to this conversation has absolutely no sense of humor. What would he be likely to think? Here are members of a possibly terrorist organization, they are meeting with a Canadian named Jaggi Singh, and talking about taking part in some kind of violent conflict involving President Bush. If the officer in question proceeded to run the names past the Canadian police, he would immediately be informed that Jaggi Singh is a notorious anarchist who has been arrested time and time again in connection with illegal protests.
Now this latter point is technically true, but once again, absurd if you have the slightest bit of context. In Canada, Jaggi is something of a public figure. He appears on TV regularly, as spokesperson for CLAC or some other radical organization. As a result, he gets arrested all the time. It has become something of a running gag in radical circles in Canada. Before every big action or mobilization, the police will almost invariably come in and arrest Jaggi Singh; partly, it would seem, just because he’s the only prominent anarchist they’ve actually heard of.
“Here come the anti-US protesters again. Everything in place?
“Riot control gas?” “Check.”
“Shields and batons?” “Check.”
“Security barriers?” “Check.”
“Jaggi Singh arrested?” Check.”[2]
One could multiply examples. It’s always a preventative arrest; Jaggi has never actually been charged with much of anything, let alone convicted, at least in part because he’s never actually done anything illegal. More than anything else, Jaggi is a radical journalist. As such, he became the regular public spokesperson for revolutionary groups. But the whole point of using the same person as one’s spokesperson all the time is that, that way, the faces of those actually planning the actions need never be seen. The idea that Jaggi, who is in fact on a public speaking tour, appearing under his own name, would come to an action planning meeting is absurd. But again, the fact that its absurd is not strictly relevant. If the police decided to charge us all with conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism, legally, it would quite possible for them to do so. They would have an extremely hard time getting a conviction, but they could easily make all our lives quite difficult for years to come.
All this might make the very idea of writing an ethnography like this rather a dubious proposition. But one has to weigh the legal possibilities with the fact that nothing like that has ever actually happened. I don’t believe there has ever been a case, over the last four years, of an activist being arrested because of something they said, or were said to have said, in a meeting—let alone an informal conversation. Activists are regularly arrested for being public spokespeople, like Jaggi. Activists have been detained at borders for belonging to supposedly violent organizations—like, for instance, many members of the New York Ya Basta! collective were eventually to be. Hundreds of activists—and, often, ordinary citizens who just happen to be standing next them—have been swept up in mass arrests during protests. When this happens a few will almost always be randomly singled out for felony charges: “assaulting an officer” or the like. These charges almost never hold up because they are almost invariably completely made up; however, they succeed in tying activists down with endless court dates and legal fees. There have definitely been bizarre and outrageous acts of repression against individuals. Activists have been put in jail for links they put on web pages, or for the possession of devices used to detect genetically modified food. None have been charged over anything they were supposed to have said in a meeting. Nonetheless, the fear that they might has had a stifling effect on activist life for years, and that fear has only grown with increasing state repression. Meetings themselves have become increasingly secretive. Those attending them become more paranoid. The results, I think, have been disastrous.
They are particularly disastrous, in my opinion, because what goes on in meetings, the structure of decision-making, is critical to the movement. Perhaps more than anything else, this is a movement about creating new forms of democracy. One reason why the media have been able to largely write off the so-called “anti-globalization” movement as an incoherent babble of positions without any central theme or central ideology is precisely because its ideology is embedded in its practice. In conscious contradistinction to past revolutionary groups, we are not going to come up with some abstract party line favoring “democracy” and then turn ourselves into a well-oiled authoritarian machine dedicated to seizing power wherever possible, so as to someday, eventually, be able to introduce it, groups like DAN or CLAC are determined to live their principles. To a large extent (as I’ve argued before: Graeber 2002), the democratic practice they’ve developed is their ideology.
To my mind this is an extremely healthy and an extremely refreshing attitude. It’s a large part of the reason I became involved in such groups to begin with. On the other hand, it creates some real dilemmas of representation. We have a movement that sees itself as creating new forms of democracy, but, because of security fears, its actual democratic process cannot be represented to anyone outside the movement in anything but the most abstract terms. Everyone is so worried about the dangers of legal repression that one can never talk about the concrete specifics of what happened at any particular meeting. It is especially ironic because this is a movement that’s otherwise remarkably sophisticated at self-representation. It includes a host of radical filmmakers, web journalists, radio activists; it involves a vast Independent Media network that first emerged from Seattle and has continued, during every major convergence, to provide detailed minute-by-minute accounts of the action. Afterwards, a video documentary will quickly, and invariably, appear. However, none of these representations will normally contain a single description of a concrete act of collective decision-making. Every major action, for instance, tends to be proceeded by a series of spokescouncils, assemblies where hundreds or even thousands of people gather to plan the action collectively, without any formal leadership structure. Yet none has ever been filmed. This despite the fact that, at some point during at least half the major spokescouncils I have attended, some radical filmmaker asked permission to film some part of the proceedings. They were invariably rebuffed. In principle, spokescouncils are open events: anyone is allowed in who is not working either for some news outlet or law enforcement, and participants are often reminded not to discuss anything they wouldn’t want the cops to know. Still, when requests are made to film, someone always blocks. As a result, as far as I’m aware, no such event has ever been recorded. So one ends up with video documentaries that show activists marching down the street chanting “this is what democracy looks like,” but contain no images of anyone actually practicing democracy.
The result is a peculiar disconnect. When activists talk to each other, they tend to talk endlessly about “process”—the nuts and bolts of direct democracy. While preparing for a major action, it seems all one does is go to meetings, trainings, more meetings. But, when one reads accounts of the same action written afterwards, almost all of this tends to disappear.
So, first of all, this book is meant to fill a gap. I will begin by using my own experience to convey a sense of what it’s actually like to take part in the planning for, and eventually participate in, a major action against a global summit. To illustrate the sorts of things activists actually argue about, what sort of issues or events become collective dramas; to get some sense of what it’s like to wade through a marathon, two-day meeting, and to come out of it feeling as if one has, in fact, just waded through a marathon two-day meeting, but at the same time that one has witnessed something profoundly transformative. As the reader may have noticed, I am making no pretense of objectivity here. I did not become involved in this movement in order to write an ethnography. I became involved as a participant. I come from an old leftist family, and for most of my life have considered myself an anarchist. If for most of my life, I also rarely got involved in anarchist politics, it was mainly because, in the 1980s and much of the 1990s, the anarchist politics I was exposed to struck me as petty, atomized, and pointlessly contentious—full of would-be sectarians whose sects consisted only of themselves. To suddenly discover the existence of a movement with a radically different sensibility, which placed enormous emphasis on mutual respect, cooperation, and egalitarian decision-making, was profoundly exhilarating. It was as if the movement I’d always wanted to be part of had suddenly come into existence. Even when I’m critical of the movement, I’m critical as an insider, someone whose ultimate purpose is to further its goals. My eventual decision to write an ethnography emerged from the same impulse. To some degree, of course, as a trained ethnographer you can’t really help yourself. Almost as soon as I got involved, I found that the notes I was taking at meetings were growing more and more detailed. They started containing little observations about hair and shoe styles, posture, habits, parenthetical reflections on little activist rituals. Still, my decision to write all this up in ethnographic form came largely because, as a participant, it struck me as an important way of furthering one of the movement’s goals: the dissemination of a certain vision of democratic possibility. In my anthropological training, I had acquired a skill that seemed perfectly suited for conveying much of what was missing from existing accounts of the movement. Though it did also occur to me that doing so would also make an extremely interesting ethnography.
But then there was the problem of how to do so without actually endangering anyone.
In the end, the solution I came up with was this. On really sensitive issues (as opposed to silly fantasies) I would not quote anything that had not already been said in some kind of public forum. I would quote things that had appeared on activist listservs, which everyone knows are monitored, or in spokescouncils or meetings open to the public, that one has to assume are probably infiltrated.[3] About other forums I would be more oblique. When dealing with things said in public forums that had any bearing on actions, I would avoid using actual names. This is not hard because for the most part, I don’t actually know people’s actual names. Or, at least, I don’t tend to know full names. Many activists go by “action names,” which they use even with their closest friends. In activist circles, it is possible to work very closely with someone for years, become close friends, even perhaps lovers, and never actually learn their full legal name. When I do know someone’s full legal name it is almost invariably because they are, like Jaggi, public figures of some sort or another whose identity does not need to be protected. Finally, whether I am describing meetings or actions, I would stick to events in which I myself fully participated; this meant I would not be asking anyone to assume, pseudonymously, a risk that I am not willing to undergo under my actual identity.
I didn’t have to start by telling the story of the mobilization around the Summit of the Americas in Québec City, of course. There were a number of others I could have chosen. In part, I started with Québec precisely because of these sorts of considerations. Not only because all the felonies described in the account were committed in Canada, but also, because this was a very militant event—the most militant, in fact, in which I’ve ever been involved—in which, as it happens, the most serious act of conspiracy of which I could possibly be accused is conspiracy to pull down a chain-link fence and then walk away from it. The story of Québec City has other obvious advantages. For one thing, I think it’s a pretty good story. It’s also useful because I wanted to avoid both the temptation to idealize the movement, or the (equally annoying) habit many activists have of only talking about its problems, which often leaves outsiders wondering why anyone would get involved in such a movement to begin with. The Québec story seemed perfect in this respect because it combines some of the best and the worst of everything. It allowed me to talk both about groups whose democratic process worked remarkably well, and others in which it was really quite atrocious; both groups which endured, and groups that fell apart; both actions that were amazingly successful, and others that were complete disasters.
Part I, therefore, will largely be about Québec. Chapter 1 will consist of a kind of diary account of the month immediately following the CLAC caravan’s visit; Chapter 2 of a more detailed account of the “consulta” in Québec City about a month before the actions; Chapter 3 will describe events leading up to the abortive action at the Seaway International Bridge at Akwesasne; Chapter 4 will describe the Québec actions themselves. It will take the form of a first-person narrative, with a fair amount of reconstructed dialogue of the kind with which I began. It will also include some pretty extensive extracts from my field notes, these mainly consisting of detailed reconstructions of what each person actually said at important activist meetings, but with occasional comments or reflections.
Part II will consist of analysis. It begins (Chapter 7) with comments on the social content of the movement, about which, I believe, there is a great deal of misunderstanding. This will be followed by a long chapter (Chapter 8) on meetings, and experiments in the creation of new democratic forms; another mapping out a typology of actions (Chapter 9), and finally a discussion of the politics of representation: media, puppets and so on (Chapter 10). I will end with a theoretical conclusion (“Imagination,” Chapter 10) consisting of a single chapter about violence and the imagination.
Writing this book—particularly the first part—has presented me with some real dilemmas of representation. I first tried to write Part I almost completely in diary form, which I thought would give some sense of the fractured and episodic quality of activist life. It was impossible, though, to maintain this. For one thing, it soon became apparent that, if I did any real justice to the richness of events, I would produce a book that no press would even consider publishing. It would be far too long. Condensation, however, brought with it endless compromise. The more one had to economize, the more the urge to put the whole thing in some sort of overall narrative form. Narrative imperatives, on the other hand, to some degree flew directly in the face of the logic of what I was trying to describe. Most obviously: good narratives don’t have hundreds of characters. Yet to employ standard narrative techniques and allow some individuals to typify others would be to employ exactly the logic of representation that the activist decision-making structures I was trying to describe were trying hardest to avoid. Even more, to place too much of a narrative framework on events would necessarily obscure the actual experience of direct actions, in which one spends months preparing events that one hopes could be narrated in certain ways, passes through a brief flurry of action in which one has very little idea what is going on, and then, ultimately, spends weeks trying to figure out what happened and arguing about how the story should, in fact, be told. I hope I have come up with a reasonable compromise, a story that is at the same time readable, publishable, and at least somewhat true to the integrity of its object.
I also hope the results will live up to the best tradition of ethnography—an attempt to describe, and to capture something of the texture and richness and underlying sense of a way of being and doing that could not otherwise be captured in writing. I also hope that, in doing so, I can offer the reader a glimpse of one small, North American fraction of a much larger, growing global social movement whose existence many are not even really aware of.
When the CLAC caravan came through, most of us in New York had been locked in a prolonged debate over whether we should be trying to get to Québec at all. At the time, the NYC Direct Action Network was concentrating its efforts on helping to organize a mass “convergence” of activists in Burlington, to run for several days leading up to the action. There everyone would hold a spokescouncil to decide what to do next. Ya Basta! had largely been left to come up with action scenarios. The problem was that there was little reason to believe that several dozen known activists loaded down with gas masks, helmets, padding, and chemical jumpsuits were ever going to be allowed across the border. That meant we either had to forgo the gear or send it to Canada well in advance—neither of which, for various reasons, were particularly plausible alternatives. Faced with a similar dilemma during the World Economic Forum protests in Geneva, Italian Ya Basta! had carried out their actions at the border itself.
For a lot of us, that made a lot of sense. All along, we had been concentrating on immigration issues. We had already appeared, in our colorful costumes, at protests at two different immigration detention facilities in New York. The New York area was particularly full of such facilities. Even in those days before September 11, there were hundreds of asylum-seekers and undocumented aliens locked up in New York, including many asylum-seekers languishing for years under twenty-three-hour lockdown, under conditions considerably worse than for many murderers and rapists. If the ultimate purpose of the international system of immigration and border controls was to lock most of humanity away in places where people in rich countries did not have to think about them, this was its ultimate manifestation: locations where human beings were literally made to vanish. Almost no one in America knew any of this was going on. One idea we were bouncing around was to somehow dramatize the situation, aggressively make the invisible reappear: for instance, to get hold of portraits of some of these detainees, and place them, perhaps along with statements or biographies, on the outside of our shields. We were also aware that the Canadian border post at Champlain, the one Americans normally pass through to travel to Québec, was right next to a very large immigration detention facility of its own. We would demand our rights, as global citizens, to march (in formation) through the border. There was some small possibility we might even get through.
Not all were entirely happy with this plan, or with the idea of any sort of border action. Many thought all this would produce was a media stunt the media wouldn’t even cover. “Direct action,” one DAN activist argued, in a post to several activist listservs, “is not symbolic!” It’s a matter of directly confronting the policy-makers responsible for capitalist globalization, of directly trying to stop their plans. Really, we should be concentrating our efforts on figuring out some way to get into Canada (and how difficult could that really be?).
I was following much of this debate online from New Haven, where I was teaching at Yale three or four days a week. At the time, my activist schedule started with the weekly Ya Basta! meeting on Thursday and ended with the DAN meeting at 6PM Sunday; then I’d take the train up to Connecticut again. It seems to me one way to give the reader a feeling for what an activist life is like would be to simply go through my notes, and give some indications of the meetings I attended during the weeks following the CLAC caravan’s visit. As will soon become apparent, there are reasons these are particularly good weeks to start from. What follows will be something like a diary, and draws extensively on the diary-like notes I did keep at the time—though very much rewritten. It will also contain some much more literal extracts from my field notes.
Every other week, instead of meetings, Ya Basta! would hold what we called “formation trainings.” These were held at a dance studio in Chelsea, made available to us by a member of the collective named Betty. Betty was a dancer and choreographer, at that time known around the New York art scene for her unique brand of shadow-dancing. She had first got drawn into activism after the electoral fiasco in Florida in 2000, fell in with the Ya Basta! crew in the bus heading down to the inaugural protests in Washington. She later explained she was attracted mainly to Ya Basta!’s theatrical, performative aspect—though she soon became a stalwart of NYC DAN as well.
The training was attended by maybe twenty people.
I should point out the term “training” is being used here very loosely, since none of us, except arguably Betty herself, really had enough experience to “train” anyone. Moose had been to Italy and seen real Ya Basta! tactics and equipment, but he’d never participated in any actions. Betty, as a dance instructor, knew a great deal about how bodies move around in space, but was new to the world of direct action. The rest of us were basically making it up as we went along. Some members of the collective had been studying ancient defensive warfare techniques involving shield walls and the like, or exchanging ideas with other collectives around the country working on similar experiments. One had recently found a pamphlet on shield tactics put together by an anarchist collective somewhere in the Midwest and posted it on our listserv (which was to have unanticipated effects later on, since the listserv was, like most activist listservs, monitored by the police). One sometime member had once been part of the Society for Creative Anachronism, and knew something about armor. Still, the question of who was “training” whom was always somewhat arbitrary: the role seemed to devolve mainly on the self-important. Not that anyone made much of an issue of it at that point because everything was so obviously all in good fun. “Trainings” were mainly just a chance to put on chemical suits and improvised padding, don the shields we had begun to put together from ashcan-shaped orange highway markers (the big plastic ones—if you cut them in half, they make two perfect three-foot shields), and bash each other about with padded sticks.
It was also a chance to debut new gear and toys. Two weeks ago, someone had come with a box full of cheap Israeli gas masks he acquired through a mail order house. This week I bring a box of kazoos (we had been talking, on and off, about the possibility of creating a Ya Basta! kazoo section). Emma immediately starts serenading us with her rendition of “I Fought the Law and the Law Won.”
“Not necessarily the most inspiring tune to have chosen.”
“Well, someone did a version called ‘I Fought the Law and I Won,’ but the music is the same.”
We have a long discussion of possible larger-scale tactics. One idea that has been floating around forever has been that of some kind of donut gun. The joke goes back to the days before the Republican National Convention in Philly, in 2000, when a newspaper reported that police commanders had been warning street cops not to accept any food protesters might “offer to try to win them over to their side.” One affinity group found this so amusing that they actually proposed setting up a table completely covered in doughnuts, with a sign saying “Police: Join Us and All This Could Be Yours!” The table never materialized. But a lot of us in Ya Basta! felt that purely defensive tactics seemed just a bit limiting. If they’re shooting plastic bullets and tear gas at you, you want to shoot something back—just not anything that could possibly be construed as harmful. Something ridiculous, absurd, but which nonetheless implied that, if this were a battle, we’d be giving as good as we got. Donuts did seem the most obvious choice of projectile. We puzzled over possibilities for how to deliver them: would it be a catapult (echoing the ancient/medieval theme)? Or more of a slingshot-type arrangement? Someone had dumpster-dived a gigantic tube and some kind of huge rubber band and brought it to the formation training but we all concluded we would have to consult with someone who actually knew something about engineering.
Anyway, the training was the fun part. Afterwards we’d have a brief formal meeting, and that was always something of a letdown. It was not only because we first got all sweaty and exhilarated and then had to sit on the ground for an hour and talk. It was also because two or three people tended to do all the talking. From the start, Ya Basta! meetings had mostly consisted of a prolonged conversation between three activists: Moose, who was in his twenties, and a slightly older married couple named Smokey and Flamma. Some had specific roles: Laura and I, for instance, constituted the propaganda and media group. But, mostly, the rest of us were relegated to throwing in occasional comments or questions. All this was partly due to the group’s unusual make-up. Moose had come out of DAN, a group that took meeting dynamics extremely seriously. DAN employed a formal consensus process with rotating facilitators, an elaborate system of “stacking” designed to ensure no small group of voices dominated the conversation. Smokey and Flamma hated DAN. Like a number of other anarchists in New York—I’ll call them the “hardcores,” for lack of a better name, the sort that were likely to have more experience in Black Blocs, tree sits, or the squatter scene, or anyway used to working in small, intimate collectives—they saw DAN’s formal structure as itself stifling and oppressive. Since Ya Basta! meetings, unlike trainings, rarely involved more than a dozen people, there didn’t seem to be too much need for formal process anyway. Usually Moose acted as de facto facilitator. This itself would have been a cardinal sin in formal consensus process, since it’s a basic principle that those intending to bring forward proposals at a meeting should never also be running it (in formal meetings, facilitators should try to avoid expressing opinions at all). Since Ya Basta! had originally been Moose’s idea, he normally did bring most of the proposals. At the time, though, none of us saw this as much of a problem—though it did make meetings rather tiresome.
The reason we didn’t see it as problem was because NYC Ya Basta! was still a new group. It’s not unusual for new activist groups to emerge from one person’s vision, and for the first few months, for one or two people to do almost all the coordinative work. Still, this cannot last forever. If the group is to become a real, sustainable collective, there inevitably comes a point where the other members take ownership. Participants start asking “why is it always the same person leading the meeting? Why is the facilitator also the one presenting all the proposals?” There follows a kind of peasant insurrection and, if the collective doesn’t dissolve in bitter recriminations, it becomes a genuinely democratic group.
In Ya Basta!, this was an open question, because, somewhat unusually, there were two foci of imaginative energy: Moose on one side, Smokey and Flamma on the other. One might think of them as different tendencies, perhaps, the DAN types versus the hardcores.[4] At the time, the situation fascinated me because I couldn’t find any sociological basis for the split: in terms of class background or trajectory, ethnicity or educational background, the two groups were indistinguishable. It was purely a difference in philosophy.
The question is of course what would happen when the peasant insurrection actually arrived.
In recent weeks, at least, meetings had started to become more interesting. Two weeks earlier, Mac, one of the Canadians in New York DAN, had come to the training to urge us to consider an alternative to Champlain: a border action at Cornwall, on a bridge in the middle of the Akwesasne Mohawk reservation. Mac was in contact with an old friend, a member of the Mohawk Warrior Society on the Canadian side, who was very enthusiastic about using the FTAA mobilization to make an issue of the fact that the US-Canadian border ran right down the middle of Mohawk lands. Despite the fact that both the US and Canada recognized their territory as sovereign by treaty, local people had to pass through an international border, and submit themselves to customs, just to visit their relatives on the other side. The Cornwall idea had an obvious appeal—especially since Mac thought he could line up a number of Canadian trade unionists to support us on the other side—but it meant abandoning the whole immigration detention issue that we’d been focusing on. It also seemed just a little too good to be true. At the first meeting we consensed to stick with Champlain. The next day, several people thought better of it and we decided, over the listserv, to postpone a decision until the next meeting. The final decision had been to investigate further; so today’s meeting was largely devoted to putting together a group of volunteers to go up to Cornwall over the weekend and check things out for themselves. Shawn, Mac’s contact there, was already getting together some fellow Warriors for the meeting. Moose had already found a car.
Actually, we ended up with two cars, since a couple of people from Philadelphia had driven up as well. In addition, we had Moose, Smokey and Flamma, with Mac representing DAN, and a couple of local anarchists currently living in the Independent Media Center (IMC). They were to set out on Saturday morning.
I was supposed to be going too, but a family medical crisis forced me to drop out. Two carloads of activists set out around 9AM. One car broke down in the Holland Tunnel and everyone had to flip coins to see who would continue on.
That evening the following report appeared over the Internet:
Representatives of NYC DAN, NYC Ya Basta!, IMC NYC, Philly Direct Action Working Group and the People’s Law Collective met in Cornwall on Saturday with Tyendinaga Mohawks, Members of the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty (OCAP), and the Guelph Direct Action Group and the People’s Community Union (PCU) in Kingston.
The Mohawks announced that they were prepared to open the border at Cornwall to activists wishing to pass into Canada on April 19, so that the latter can join a caravan to Québec City already being organized by activists in Kingston.
The Mohawks intend this “Day of Rage” as an assertion of sovereignty, since the bridge crossing this border is on Mohawk Land. Currently, Mohawks allow use of the crossing 364 days a year, and open it once a year to assert sovereignty.
This information has since been taken back to the groups in question and submitted to their own process of democratic decision-making. So far, NYC-DAN, NYC-Ya Basta!, and several traditional Mohawk houses have publicly declared their support for this action.
When I read this at the time it seemed a bit opaque. Things became clearer at the DAN meeting the next day. Let me give a fuller account that particular meeting, since it was one of the more interesting I attended.
We met in our usual room at Charas, an activist social center in the Lower East Side. The meeting started small: perhaps ten or twelve of us, though over the next hour or so a lot more drifted in, until, at its height, there were twenty-five or thirty. That day, we also had no less than three foreign visitors: Mike and Corey from SalAMI, and Olivier de Marcellus, who worked with Peoples’ Global Action in Switzerland. The SalAMI people were on an eleven-day American tour, giving action trainings in cities across the Northeast. They were being hosted largely by the International Socialist Organization (ISO), and were accompanied by a local ISO organizer. Olivier just happened to be in town.
Nicky and Betty facilitated. I volunteered to take minutes.
Unlike Ya Basta!, DAN meetings had an explicit formal process. They always began the same way. First, we put together an agenda. There was always a skeleton agenda already written on the wall, but everyone had the opportunity to add new items, and then we allocated time for each of them: five minutes for one, fifteen for another, one or two very minor announcements. Mike and Corey had to leave early so we put them up first.
I think everyone was at least a bit curious about Mike and Corey because until now we’d all been dealing only with CLAC, and hearing about the SalAMI folk only second-hand as the irritating pacifists. Most of us were curious what they’d actually be like. As it turned out, both young men were quite well-groomed in button-down shirts and dockers—pleasant-looking fellows who spoke with a slight French accent.
They both stood up. Mike explained that SalAMI had been organizing in Québec City for three years now, but since word had got out about the security fence, they had determined that they weren’t going to be purely reactive and face the enemy on their own terms. So, instead of Québec, they were planning an action in Ottawa, the Canadian capital. The key issue, he explained, was that all the negotiations around the FTAA were being conducted in secret. Apparently, after the failure of WTO talks in Seattle, the US trade negotiators had decided their big mistake had been to give the public some idea what it was they were negotiating. This time they weren’t going to make the same mistake. None of the drafts or any information about what was in them was being released to the public—though all this information was being made available to corporations like McDonald’s, Monsanto, and Citibank.
Mike: The idea is that on April 1st, we’ll organize a mass demo in Ottawa. We’ve reserved three rooms in Parliament to put the FTAA on trial…
Someone: Wait a minute—you managed to reserve rooms in Parliament?
Corey: Well, it was one of our labor union allies that made the actual reservations.
Majeed: Remember, Canada is a different country. Unions actually have some rights there.
Mike: …also, we’re going to invite anyone working on FTAA projects to let us drill them there, so the next day, the 2nd, we can conduct a nonviolent CD—a blockade of the Foreign Affairs and Trade offices. We’re going to do what we call a “search and seizure” action, go in, in search of the text. We’ve announced we’re going to do this if they don’t release the text by March 20th. Of course, in order to pull it off, we’ll need lots of help, to raise media awareness.
Various details followed on attempts to get folksinger Ani DiFranco’s support and possible participation, the media blackout on the FTAA in the US (though coverage was pretty decent in Canada), and other issues. Majeed asked about diversity of tactics.
Mike: Well, obviously we would never turn people over to police, like some emails have been saying. And, if you’re talking about our earlier guidelines, with the rules against masks and whatnot: no, we’ve gotten rid of those. But when we hear the phrase “diversity of tactics”—well, that sounds to us like a euphemism for “free-for-all.”
SalAMI has been putting together what we call a “convergence table,” with over thirty different groups, including unions and student and church groups that the CLAC would never be able to reach. That’s what we consider real diversity. But it’s necessarily based on a principle of nonviolent action; these groups would never even be talking to us if they thought we’d ask them to endorse an action with no parameters at all.
Corey: As for CLAC … Sure, there are leadership issues. And alpha male issues. But we’re still trying to pull things together. Our Creative Action Training is meant for both sides, and we hope that, when the action finally happens, we won’t have two different spokescouncils. If we can at least agree on no molotov cocktails, we can have a single spokescouncil. Otherwise, well, we’re just playing to a fraction of one percent of the movement in my own personal opinion.
Mike: I’ll leave my email.
Corey: Tomorrow we’re having a training at NYU, at 7PM, Help spread word!
Brooke: Actually, I should probably point out that DAN represents a diversity of opinion and our Continental DAN principles are actually sort of vague on the nonviolence issue. I think intentionally so. The exact wording is DAN calls for “nonviolent civil disobedience and direct action.” So we support both. LA DAN is pretty strictly nonviolent. CLAC is trying to get on the CDAN call and it would be good for you guys to also hook into that too.
Mike: These are not easy questions, but I think it’ll all work out (laughs) and Québec will be amazing. It might not be all smiles and hugging each other, but when push comes to shove, we’re all in this together.
Zoe: How long will it be before the barbed wire fence goes up?
Mike: Well, most of the concrete was already laid down before the ground froze. But that’s just the base. Apparently it will be four kilometers around—that’s a 2.5 mile perimeter—surrounding a section of the city with 25,000 residents. They’re all going to be receiving special cards which will authorize them to move in and out. There’s been some effort to encourage people to refuse or even better—this was my suggestion—burn them.
SP: What about people who work in there?
Mike: I’m not sure how they’re handling that. Presumably they’ll be getting some kind of ID too.
Majeed: I have a question. CLAC and CASA (Comité d’accueil du Sommet des Amériques) are explicitly anti-capitalist. What about SalAMI?
Mike: Well, yes, I think you could say we are. Myself personally, I don’t like to use the word ‘capitalism’ because it turns some people off. We’ve taken a common ground approach, but in order to promote a radical alternative vision—right now we have a committee working on mapping some of that out. Certainly you can assume all the basics: we’re anti-capitalist, anti-patriarchy, anti-homophobia.
Corey: You have to understand this is going to be one of the largest security actions in history. We decided early on that a Seattle-style shutdown is highly improbable. We’re not going to stop the Summit from happening. So the question when it comes to the wall was: how can we come up with a model for what might be considered a win? What would give us the right to declare victory? People are working on it. One women’s group sent out a call to weave images and slogans of resistance into the fence itself. This would be powerful for the media, but wouldn’t please everyone, certainly. So then what? Target the airports? Do a blockade, close off the gates, and piss off all the residents? This is why we’re calling for a strategic spokescouncil, to make our tactics square with our strategic aims. What’s really important is how our actions effect the public, what they’ll do in terms of constructing long-term alliances…
Olivier remarks, in a soft, very dignified voice, that all this sounds very similar to what happened in Davos during the World Economic Forum protests the month before. The police overreacted and were stopping people miles away from the actual meetings. The repression was so brutal—they were sending police out into the fields to gather cowshit to mix with the water in their water-cannons—that it backfired, causing a huge public backlash and complete victory for us. By the end, when there was a little riot in Geneva (they set fire to several banks), polls actually showed the public were still more supportive of the protesters than the government. And this is in Switzerland!
The SalAMI folk are skeptical. “You can try to go through the wall if you like,” says Mike. “But you have to bear in mind there’s going to be eight thousand cops, five hundred Darth Vaders you’d have to outrun if you actually did get in. That’s why we decided our strategy during the Summit itself will be not to approach the wall at all, but to establish what we’re calling the “Freedom and Truth Areas of the Americas,” maybe a kilometer away. SalAMI wants to maintain this as a truly liberated zone, and you know” (significant glance at the Yabbas in the room), “there’s real room for Ya Basta! tactics to keep the cops out of it.”
Mike and Corey have to run off for a training at NYU. They leave with their ISO chaperone and the meeting carries on.
Next up is Lesley’s report-back from the Mohawk trip—which, she says, went very well indeed. The seven or eight people who made it to Cornwall had met not only with members of the Mohawk Warrior Society but also members of the Kingston Labor Council on the Canadian side (“along with a couple guys from Guelph who we’re calling ‘the Guelph Action Network’”). The Mohawks pledged to open the border to demonstrate their control over the land in Akwesasne. Shawn, their main spokesman, was framing the action as a “day of rage” over the division of their land and both governments’ trampling of treaty rights. The Warriors were hinting at very militant tactics, talking of opening the bridge “by any means necessary”—all of which, Lesley remarks, is really something of a bluff, but it could put the Canadian government in an extremely delicate position as they really would not want to use too much force on Mohawk lands. That really would unify the community against them. In fact, they did not expect any significant opposition: the Warriors actually had been in the habit of seizing the bridge one day a year, for the last few years, as an assertion of sovereignty, and the government had never made any effort to stop them. Canadian auto and postal workers were already planning a caravan from Toronto and Kingston to Québec City; they’d be happy to be there on the other side of the border to support us. “Oh yes,” she added, “and the District Labor Council says they will serve tea.”
All sorts of radical ideas were being bounced around. Some Canadians were talking about the possibility of taking over the locks of the St. Lawrence, to close down shipping traffic. But there was also a word of caution. “Bear in mind Akwesasne itself is a very fragmented, very divided community. They had their own little civil war over there in the 1980s over plans to build a casino. The people we’re dealing with are from the Warrior Houses (who were against the casino); they’re with us, even if everyone in these communities is hardly unanimous.”
I ask how much of this was to go in the minutes—which are posted to an open-subscription listserv. “In fact, the Mohawks told us specifically they want this information to be made public, especially the phrase: ‘Mohawk Warriors calling for Days of Rage.’”
Lesley’s report-back is followed by a number of other announcements: of a benefit for Casa del Sol, a squat in the Bronx; upcoming court dates for the Esperanza Garden defendants (they had been arrested defending a community garden from bulldozers some months before); a reminder of puppet-making every Saturday afternoon for the More Gardens! group. There were also report-backs from various DAN working groups: Labor, Police and Prisons, Legal; the WBAI campaign; the Web team; the Women’s Caucus. Brooke announced that Continental DAN (CDAN) had received a request from some people in Santa Cruz to join the CDAN network. (“Probably a bunch of hippies and deadheads, but we love them anyway.”) There is also a report from the newly created Banner Working Group, which seems to consist of two decidedly crusty looking individuals in black hooded sweatshirts, who unveil a beautiful banner that one of them had painted for DAN to carry during marches.
Next comes New Business. The first item on the agenda is the Burlington Convergence. This, Brooke explained, is beginning to turn into a problem. The original idea had been to provide a place for people to start gathering on Monday April 16, so as to proceed to the border Thursday and ideally make it to Québec in time for the CLAC “Carnival Against Capitalism” parade on Friday the 20th. That way, there would be several days for everyone to hold trainings, educational events, and spokescouncils. However, at the moment we had just four or five people in Vermont trying to organize everything. Also, the event was technically being organized through NEGAN, the “New England Global Action Network.” In principle, NEGAN was the local equivalent to DAN—but unfortunately, it was top-heavy with “anti-corporate” types, liberal reformers, Greens, and socialist groups—notably the ISO. The ISO had its own agenda and it appeared to have little overlap with ours.
Some background is required here. The ISO is one of the few of the innumerable Trotskyist sects that were founded and split from one another over the course of the 1960s and 1970s that had managed to survive and even expand in the intervening years. It had done so because, unlike the others, the ISO did not concentrate its recruiting efforts in factories but on college campuses. In 2001, the ISO was, in many ways, the anarchist nemesis—particularly, DAN’s. This was in part because they were trying to do similar things via radically different methods. Both were revolutionary anti-capitalists. Both believed in working within broad coalitions and trying to encourage them in more radical directions. The problem was that for the ISO, this was a very long-term process, and in the meantime they were mainly interested in numbers. They were always trying to put together the broadest coalitions possible, which meant wooing the leadership of unions and mainstream NGOs, who would, in turn, almost invariably want guarantees against violence or, often, against direct action of any kind. From the anarchist perspective, this was like trying to put an army of a hundred thousand people in the field, but only on condition that none of them actually do anything.
It would not have been nearly so annoying if the ISO were simply opposed to direct action. Then one could just ignore them. Their members attended spokescouncils and, often, took part in actions themselves. Hence, they were the ones at the spokes always trying to talk everyone into ratcheting things down, turning a plan for militant direct action into an act of strictly nonviolent civil disobedience, turning a plan for nonviolent civil disobedience into a unpermitted march, turning a unpermitted march into a permitted one. The strategy of seeking the largest possible coalition ensured they tended to be chary even of groups that put out too radical a message: it became a kind of running gag among anarchists that if you label an organization “anti-capitalist,” you can guarantee the socialists won’t show up. Finally, groups like the ISO were explicitly vanguardist. They saw themselves as having the correct analysis of the world situation. When they did get involve in broader coalitions, it only made sense that they should provide direction and leadership.
Anarchists, in contrast, tend to refer to their strategy as “contaminationist.” The assumption is that direct action and direct democracy are infectious; almost anyone exposed to them is likely to be transformed by the experience. Anyway the point is not to organize people but to encourage them to organize themselves. Rather than making deals with labor bureaucrats, then, groups like CLAC or DAN tried to appeal directly to the rank and file. Rather than try to take over large organizations, they aimed to create dramatic models of self-organization that others might be inspired to imitate, if, inevitably, it was assumed, in their own idiosyncratic ways.
All this no doubt makes it easier to see why the SalAMI tour was being sponsored by the ISO, and why Mike and Corey came, and left, escorted by an ISO chaperone.
To return to NEGAN then…
The week before, Moose and Marina, a longstanding DAN activist (and former ISO member), had gone up to a NEGAN meeting in Worcester, Massachusetts. Neither were at the DAN meeting today—they had come back with the flu—but everyone knew what happened. The meeting was full of ISO people, who insisted on creating a steering committee, and pushed for majority voting instead of consensus. (One cannot, after all, attempt to pack a steering committee that does not operate by majority vote.) They also proposed that NEGAN concentrate on organizing buses to go up to Québec City on Saturday, so they could work with the labor unions that were going to be bussing their people to the march that day. They argued that this would make it much easier to get through the border. It would also, however, mean completely skipping the day of direct action scheduled for the day before. It was all an enormous problem because the logical thing should have been for DAN to throw all its resources into the Burlington Convergence—organizing spokescouncils and the like was, after all, what we did best. But it looked like the anarchists were simply being bypassed:
Brooke: I have a lot of names of people up there [in Burlington], but… I hope I don’t insult anyone by saying this but: Burlington used to have a Direct Action group. But it was overrun by ISOs and socialist types. Biella and the Native Forest Networks are more anarchist—the former is one woman who’s doing most of the organizing for the convergence basically single-handedly. I’m trying hard to get the Institute for Social Ecology involved (which they will if they know what’s good for them), but so far they haven’t done much either, so for the moment things are really not in good shape up there.
Majeed: You know, I don’t mean to be vulgar or sectarian, but I say, “fuck the ISO.”
David: Um, should I put that in the notes?
Majeed: Actually, yeah. Put it in the notes.
Brooke: Bear in mind there are people reading the notes as far away as California.
Majeed: Whatever. Frankly, I’m just sick of those guys. The moment there’s the slightest illusion of being in a position of power they take over and immediately cut off all debate. They’ve been doing this since at least the Gulf War. I say let’s just contact the “authentic elements.”
David: (still scribbling) “Authentic elements?”
Majeed: You know: people who are doing this because they want the mobilization to succeed, not to further some fucking organizational imperative.
Majeed, a former member of the Iranian Communist Party (which he explained to us was largely Kurdish), now active in DAN Labor, had, since becoming an anarchist, become unusually impatient with vanguardists.
After renewing our determination to help out with “authentic elements” in Burlington, we talk a little about the next scheduled weekly meeting. As it happens, this falls at the same time as a Critical Resistance protest against the Horizon Center, a juvenile detention center in Midtown. Someone suggests: Why don’t we all go to the rally and, if there’s any urgent business that needs to be discussed, we can do it on the subway platform where everyone is supposed to be assembling anyway? Everyone agrees, though Brooke is careful to insist we post it to the list immediately and prominently.
The end of the meeting is quite unusual. Technically, there was an option at the end of every DAN meeting to hold an “educational session.” I don’t think we ever had. But everyone is anxious to learn about Peoples’ Global Action. We had all heard of PGA—in fact, DAN was in a certain sense modeled on it—but few of us (except for Lesley, who has been studying PGA as a grad student in Columbia) really knew that much about, aside from the fact that it was a global network created by the Zapatistas that put out calls for simultaneous global days of action and, most famously, had originally come up with the idea of a global day of action against the WTO meetings in Seattle. So we asked Olivier—or “Oliver,” as he insisted on calling himself—to give us a little background. Olivier is a man who looks to be in his fifties or early sixties, a very aristocratic, European-looking fellow with a truly extraordinary nose. We’re rather surprised to learn he’s actually an American, a 1960s refugee who fled the country over Vietnam and had been living in Geneva ever since.
Olivier: Hello. My name’s Oliver de Marcellus, and I’m from Geneva. I’ve been living there since I left the States in 1968. I’ve been with PGA since it started in 1998; before that, I was working with the Zapatista movement.
Brooke: We’d really like to hear more about the history.
Olivier Well, you can read more about it on our web page, which is [[http://www.agp.org][www.agp.org]. (That’s from the French or Spanish acronym. If you type “pga” it’ll send you to the Professional Golf Association.)
About PGA … hmmm. I guess there’s two ways of talking about PGA. The easiest is to say, you can be a member of PGA whether you know it or not. Because PGA is nothing but five principles (which are, I believe, DAN’s founding principles as well). Well, that, and also, taking part in actions which accord with those principles. So, if you look at it that way the only definition of PGA is “people who agree with the manifesto.” By that definition there’s millions of people in PGA and most of them don’t even know it.
That’s the large definition. The smaller definition, which almost doesn’t exist, is as an organization. We’re not supposed to be an organization. We have no funds, no secretariat, no one is qualified to speak for PGA. We do have an International Conveners Committee, with representatives from groups from different continents who are rotated every two years. All this Committee can do is convene international PGA meetings, decide who comes and who from the Global South gets free tickets.
Maggie: How do you define “Global South?”
Olivier: Everywhere but Europe and North America.
At first the Conveners were also supposed to decide on global days of action, but as it turned out it was so hard to get some of them to answer emails and the like, that groups started taking the initiative on their own. So, the way it’s worked out is that actions end up being proposed by the most concerned local groups, the call circulates on the Net to everyone involved, and those who are interested take part, those who aren’t, ignore it. Which I guess is the most democratic way to go about it. (Usually the actions then end up getting approved five months later by the Conveners Committee, retroactively, but no one really notices.)
For instance, the Geneva demonstrations in 1998 were called by the Conveners. The Reclaim the Streets in England called the J18 demos the year after—they proposed it, and people just started doing it. N30 was the same thing—that was the biggest thing we ever did, but it started just as a call to have an action against the WTO, wherever it met, even before we knew it was going to meet in Seattle. In the case of [the actions against the IMF meetings in] Prague it was the same thing—a local group proposed it, and it was taken up. So I guess that’s how we’ve been doing it since 1999.
Brooke: Could you talk about the upcoming conference?
Olivier: Yes. The International PGA conference is going to be held in Cochabamba from the 17th to the 24th of September, and the call really will come out this week (I’m sorry, I know we keep saying it, but it really will this week). We’re aiming for two hundred delegates, of whom seventy percent have to be from the South or East; sixty from Western Europe and North America and the rest from the “Global South.” The most sizeable contingent will be from Latin America. Right now the epicenter for resistance to globalization is the Andes; that’s the vital spot, which is why we’re holding it in Bolivia to begin with. Well, obviously of course, because that’s the city where there was the huge campaign against Bechtel when they tried to privatize the water system, which was spearheaded by PGA-affiliated groups.
But we’re really hoping there won’t be a coup before it happens.
Stuart: If they did have a coup, it could hardly make the government any worse.
Olivier: But if the hosts are all in hiding, it will make it very difficult to organize.
Also we’re trying to start a more decentralized funding system—which is crucial for getting tickets to the delegates from the South because airfare is just hugely expensive. At the Conveners Meeting in Prague in December, we decided we couldn’t keep getting money from foundations because the more effective we become, the fewer foundations will want to give money to us.
Lesley: And what is the money actually used for?
Olivier: Just for the one thing: to fly delegates into the meetings.
[some discussion follows of DAN’s potential involvement in the Cochabamba meetings… We decide we should really put the PGA manifesto on our web page]
Olivier: That would actually be useful, as one of the functions of the conference is to amend the manifesto. For instance, European delegates will want to make sure something about climate change is put in there as it didn’t seem as obviously pressing when we first wrote the thing in 1998.
David: Can you tell us a little about how it all started?
Olivier: Well, PGA was very definitely first conceived as part of the Zapatista movement. You could sort of say it was founded during the Second Intergalactic Zapatista Encuentro in Spain in 1997. That was when the groups that became the backbone of PGA first met: the European anarchists, the Brazilian Landless Peasants Movement, and—actually, probably the most important group of all was the KRRS. That’s the Karnataka State Farmers’ Association, which is a Gandhian Socialist peasant movement in India which has something like ten million members. They first became famous for their “Cremate Monsanto” campaign in the mid-1990s, where they systematically burned genetically modified crops. Last year KRRS mobilized 51,000 people in bullock carts who tried to seize the port of Bombay—and for them, that was, really, just a medium-size action. In May 1998 they turned 280,000 people for a mass anti-WTO demo. That was probably their biggest. But they work on a colossal scale.
Natalie: You know you should really have all this history stuff on the web page.
Olivier: I know. We should. We probably have the corniest web site in existence; it was probably the first anti-globalization web page, but the design is horrendous.
Stuart: You talk about proposals emerging from local groups—by “local groups” do you just mean “any groups that have endorsed the principles”?
Olivier: Well, another aspect of this non-organizational status is that there’s no formal membership. Anyone can propose something.
David: So in theory, we could too?
Olivier: Oh, absolutely. Why not?
But back to the history. PGA had its first meeting in Spain, in 1998, and at that first meeting there were a lot of anarchists from England, like people from Reclaim the Streets-London, active in the anti-roads movement who had no idea similar things were happening on the continent and vice versa. They met the squatters in Italy and Germany, and ideas started to spread. None of us on the Continent, for instance, had ever heard of the idea of a British-style illegal street party. A month later we were organizing one in Geneva. And it was wonderful. Before long, people were organizing them everywhere.
Someone came up with the theory that the result was a kind of global brain: the interconnections of communication are such that you can imagine people not just communicating but acting, and acting damn effectively, without leadership, a secretariat, without even formal information channels. It’s a little like ants meeting in an ant-heap, all waving their antennae at each other, and information just gets around—even though there’s no chain of command or even hierarchical information structure.
Of course it would be impossible without the Internet.
Someone: Of course, they said that at first about the Zapatistas, too.
Olivier: Actually, it was a little annoying at first how the media used to say how the Zapatistas were simply an Internet phenomenon—annoying, that is, for people who actually know how hard it is to reach them. But in a way it’s sort of true. An Internet list by nature can’t be authoritarian—you just put out a proposition and people discuss it, those who like it, go do it. If it’s not that good a proposal, people will do it less. The one thing you absolutely can’t do over the Internet is vote.
Stuart: All this sounds so much like DAN!
Olivier: You know, when I arrived in Seattle for the WTO actions, I didn’t even know what DAN was. Then I picked up a DAN leaflet and there were the PGA principles and pictures of Geneva actions inside, and I said, “Oh, it’s just PGA.” That happens to me all the time. I met someone from PGA Korea last week, and it was: “Really? That exists?” In Prague, there were two busloads of Turks who showed up. It turned out there was a five-city PGA network in Turkey, they’d downloaded our principles from the web page and were going around showing films of Seattle. None of us had the slightest idea until we actually met them. It keeps happening all the time.
Of course, now that there’s Indymedia the information gets back to us more than it used to. When the Net-freaks first explained the idea of simultaneous demos to us, we used to try to coordinate it by everyone sending emails to Geneva. It didn’t work. Bsut now we outsource it to Indymedia, as it were. So, during the actions in Prague, we had 250 simultaneous demos worldwide, of which 70 were reported on Indymedia. And that, in turn, changes our relation to the corporate media—basically, we don’t even need them any more. A few months ago we had an action in Geneva where we occupied the Ecuadorian embassy in solidarity with people holding an action there. After the whole thing was over, we realized we had forgotten to even tell the media about it, because who needs them? It’ll get back to the people in Ecuador that we did it through Indymedia, and that’s all that was really important to us.
What’s happening now is surely the biggest thing since May 1968. At least in Europe. The first time that I’ve felt such a huge, global upsurge. Prague was just… whoa! There were at least eight different countries that sent contingents of over a thousand people. When we started none of us had any idea how to put together a mass convergence or a spokescouncil, we had to make it all up from scratch. Then, come September: lo and behold! It worked! And we ended up kicking the IMF out of town a day early.
And every meeting had to be coordinated in seven different languages: English, France, German, Turkish, Spanish, Italian, Czech…
Brooke: Jesus!
Olivier: But it worked!
Betty: Could you speak about the actions in Davos, and what lessons we could learn from them for Québec City?
Olivier: Well, on that:
Unhappily, we appear to represent the biggest threat to the Empire around right now, and they appear to be getting really concerned. I’m sorry to say it because really we’re just a ridiculous bunch of clowns, but there you are.
In Nice, we thought they’d try to block the frontiers before we even got there, and in fact they did—totally illegally—at least against the Italians who in theory have the same EU passports. They also used interesting divide-and-conquer tactics like providing free trains for the union people, and then trying to beat the shit out of the Autonomous people.
We expected the frontiers to be blocked, and that getting to Davos itself would be impossible; so we said, if we can’t get there, we’ll do actions and blockades wherever we have to. If we couldn’t get further than the bottom of the valley where the train meets the highway, below the ski resort where the meetings was actually being held, then fine, we’d block the auto routes there. Or if we can’t get into the country, if they try to close the border, we’d close the border ourselves. We ended up having demos in all three, which was great—five hundred Italians stopped at the border blocked the highway there, five hundred other people snuck into Davos itself, which was great, and there were something like five different groups in the valley bottom… It was a total victory, despite the biggest security mobilization in Swiss history, with tanks and barbed wire everywhere, blasting us with water cannons, tear gas and rubber bullets the moment we’d even appear—even when it was just a bunch of silly floats and people dressed up on stilts or in Ronald McDonald costumes. In the end, they overdid it so much even the highly bourgeois Swiss public was on our side. Several cantons voted to remove the federal police from their territory, the president ended up making a fool of himself at the press conference that night because he wanted to talk about the deliberations in Davos, and kept snapping at the reporters, “Why do you keep asking about the demonstrations?”
Natalie: Were there any arrests?
Olivier: Oh yes. But they had to let them out quickly.
So as far as the FTAA is concerned—there’s no reason not to block them in, even if there is this enormous security fence, there still have to be gates. Any place you can block them, the point is made…
We go on talking for some time, about the problems of coordinating with groups with little or no Internet access, about the amazing PGA group called the “Network of Free Black Communities of South America,” founded by escaped slaves in the nineteenth century, about a dozen other things. By the time we headed off to a nearby coffee shop to continue the conversation, it was already almost 11PM.
Actually I missed this one (along with the DAN Labor meeting held at the same time), but I heard what happened.
The FTAA Coalition is a broad, New York-wide group which includes DAN, the Greens, the ISO, and various independent activists organizing for Québec City. So when Moose and Marina finally emerged from their sickbeds to give their report-back from the NEGAN meeting, they had to be relatively circumspect. Apparently there was also some ambiguity about the degree to which the Mohawks on the US side are really on board, since we had only been talking to Canadian ones so far. There was some kind of process going on among the Warrior Houses on the American side and no one was quite sure how things would turn out. There were also increasing tensions about the structure of the coalition itself.
A much better meeting than usual, held at Aladdin’s apartment in a public housing development in Chelsea. There were about twenty people. This time, the meeting was even facilitated: informally, but well. Even more unusual, everything was captured on videotape.
There’s a long story behind this, but the short version is that there was a young filmmaker named Sasha who had contacted people in the activist community because he wanted to make a documentary. His idea was to contrast standard media images of scary masked anarchists with portraits of the real human beings behind the masks. He soon became involved in Ya Basta! and within a month or two had become effectively part of the group. No one had much trouble with that. But this was the first time he had actually shot a meeting. Actually, it’s the first I know of anyone shooting a meeting of any such group at all—in part, he got away with it only because he promised not to show anybody’s faces, always keeping his camera pointed low. One or two members actually wore masks for the meeting, mainly, I suspected, for dramatic effect.
Anyway, as meetings went, it turned out to be an excellent choice.
There was already a small crisis brewing with the Mohawk action, due to premature publicity. While Shawn, our main ally, had specifically asked for us to use the words “Days of Rage,” and while a piece had immediately come out in a local magazine called Eye News, quoting him as saying that they would seize the bridge “by all means necessary” and showing pictures of masked Mohawk Warriors with machine guns from the Oka occupation in Québec in the 1980s, all this was something in the nature of a bluff. Shawn was calculating that, after the trauma of the near-insurrection and long standoff with the Canadian government over Oka in the 1980s, and a previous near-civil war in Akwesasne itself, the Canadian government would not risk sending a large military contingent if they thought real conflict was likely.
What Moose was really worried about was premature publicity. Specifically, about a dispatch sent out by the two independent, IMC anarchists who had come along on the trip, Target and Warcry. Both were in their own way minor legends in the movement. Target was a punky kid famous for his Black Bloc exploits, who seemed to change his name every other week. Warcry, born in India, was a former tree-sitter, eco-activist, and independent journalist, who then had a reputation as a kind of anarchist poster girl, prominently featured in just about every movie about Seattle—partly owing to charisma, partly because she was one of the few Black Bloc anarchists willing to give interviews. On their return from Canada, they had immediately posted a call of their own that was forwarded to a series of anarchist listservs. In it—at least according to Moose—they had grossly misrepresented what was going on as an ultra-militant armed event and urging anarchists to participate. Apart from being childish, Moose stressed, this was completely out of process: we’d promised not to say anything we weren’t specifically authorized to say. He said we’ll be talking to Warcry later to see if they can’t post some kind of correction, or at least milder version.
Actually, some people were growing concerned with the whole situation. What’s up with the picture of the Mohawk Warrior with the M16? Are these guys really going to be carrying guns? Moose assured us they wouldn’t. At Oka, they occupied a bridge for two months before they even started carrying guns, and even then they never used them on anyone, even when the police fired on them. It’s all a bit of a ploy, he told us. People who lack the privilege of white activists are not in a position of being able to claim to be doing nonviolent action even when, in fact, they are.
Moose also says Shawn has been assuring us that getting through at the bridge will not be a problem, anyway. The problem is more likely to be roadblocks on the way.
So we formally consense on our support for the Cornwall action. Then, after yet another report on NEGAN, we start talking about the larger, New York-wide anti-FTAA Coalition, which actually is experiencing similar problems. The coalition is top-heavy with Greens and ISO people, and organizational tensions have become such that we’ve agreed to a special meeting on Friday just to sort things out. (“Marina is going. She’s the process queen,” observes Moose. She’s also a one-time ISO member turned anarchist who presumably knows how such people think.)
The big news is that CLAC is having a “consulta,” or spokescouncil in Québec City on the 23rd, and Ya Basta! needs to send representatives—especially since during the last consulta, our people didn’t make it through. I volunteer. So does Emma, an artist currently working in a health food store on the Lower East Side. Emma points out she might not be an ideal choice, since, while part of the collective, she doesn’t intend to do Ya Basta!, but is going to be with the Black Bloc. No one seems to mind.
The selection of delegates is not as delicate a matter as it might be because spokes are not, technically, empowered to make decisions for the group. They’re not really representatives. They are basically conduits for information: they explain what their group is intending to do, bring proposals, and convey information and proposals back to the group for it to consider collectively. (In a proper spokescouncil, where the other members of the affinity group are actually present in the room, this can happen on the spot. At a consulta where they aren’t, the number of decisions that can be made is much more limited.) Still, this raises the question: what is Ya Basta! in fact planning to do, if we do get through to Québec City? For the rest of the meeting, we consider the possibilities. Since no one is much interested in the idea of protecting SalAMI’s autonomous zone in the middle of nowhere, these come down to: (1) helping pull down the wall, (2) trying to get through the wall and enter the perimeter, or (3) providing some sort of diversion—since one thing we do know is that if you do dress up in bright padded outfits, the police will definitely follow you around. The wall is an obvious symbol of the hypocrisy of neoliberalism, but some of us find it a little too symbolic. On the other hand, if we could get inside the perimeter, what would we do there? Smokey had heard a story about a homeless shelter there that effectively had to close down operations because of the Summit—perhaps we could get them to formally invite us to provide security? Someone else had been pursuing the idea of dramatizing the fates of disappeared asylum-seekers: the Coalition for the Defense of the Rights of Immigrants had suggested we might think about placing not their pictures, but a series of specific demands on shields and banners and delivering them to the Summit. But to whom? And how to air them? The US media would never cover the story.
This led to a long debate on the pros and cons of an action against the media itself. Would it be possible, for instance, to shut down the media tent outside the summit building, or even demand they play some tape containing the voices of those frozen out of debate? All agree that the corporate media is a legitimate target, but how would an action against it be effective? What would constitute success? This is the basic question we come up with over and over again in planning for an action: how do we frame the event in such a way that we have the right to declare victory afterwards? And in the case of the media it was particularly acute: even if you did carry out a successful action against the media, who would know?
We don’t come to any decisions. Anyway, as a few people point out, we’re just one collective. Other Ya Basta! groups will be joining at Burlington and we don’t want to make decisions for them. We can save that for the Burlington spokes. But by the time the meeting is over both Emma and I have a fairly clear idea of what we’re going to say.
A final announcement. Moose says: “I’m supposed to tell people that Starhawk is going to be in town tomorrow.” (He pronounces it with a note of mild mockery: Staaaarhawk.) “I mean, me, I’m not too down with this kind of superstar celebrity bullshit, but she apparently wants to meet some of the New York Ya Basta! Collective so I figured I would pass it on.”
This meeting consisted of maybe twenty activists ranged around a table in the back of a pizza joint pretending that they weren’t having an argument.
What is now called the FTAA Coalition began as a Direct Action Network working group. DAN had a general meeting every Sunday, and a whole series of working group meetings on other days of the week. Some of these working groups are structural (legal, media, outreach) , some are engaged in ongoing campaigns (DAN Labor, Police & Prisons) but there are always some that are just created to work on some specific action: whether the IMF protests in Washington, the Republican convention in Philly, and now, the FTAA in Québec. Often, these latter working groups themselves could start looking like miniature versions of DAN, with their own working groups to handle outreach, communications, transportation, and the like. They became like cellular structures budding off and then reproducing the same internal relation between the parts. We could afford to be flexible because after all, there was no fixed, top-down chain of command; initiatives were supposed to rise from below anyway; so everyone was free to improvise whatever organizational form seemed to work for them.
The problems came when DAN tried to work with members of groups with profoundly different organizational imperatives. I’ve already mentioned the great DAN bugaboo, the ISO. The ISO had become involved in DAN-style politics only recently. They had played little or no part in Seattle. Sometime afterwards, however, they apparently received orders from central command in England to get involved with the global justice movement. Suddenly, all sorts of high-ranking ISO organizers started appearing at DAN meetings. Their enthusiasm seemed to ebb and flow. They had participated enthusiastically in the first big NYC-DAN action—A16, the anti-IMF protests in Washington on April 16, 2000—but, after the Republican convention protests in Philly, during which the ISO contingent was widely accused of having abandoned their position and run away, they largely dropped out and threw their energy behind the Nader presidential campaign. Now they were back.
Working groups were in principle open. Anyone could join. In this case, when DAN created a working group for the FTAA mobilization back in January, the ISO folks had suddenly reappeared, along with members of some other groups they had been working with—the Green Party, certain NGOs—who had never, in fact, been to a DAN meeting proper. Since the ISO and Greens, at least, were not there as individuals but as representatives of organizations, the working group in effect became a coalition. So it seemed only reasonable to declare it one and abandon the pretense of its being a part of DAN. This was not a problem since DAN working groups were pretty much autonomous anyway.
So now we had a city-wide coalition which ostensibly worked on anarchist, or anyway directly democratic, principles. In principle, this was just what DAN should have wanted: we were all about disseminating this kind of decision-making model. But there followed an inevitable clash of institutional cultures. The newcomers immediately started treating the coalition like a new organization: they wanted to adopt principles of unity, create outreach literature, and try to get other groups around the city, immigrant groups, labor unions, and the like, to join. The anarchists didn’t think of the coalition as a “group” at all. They saw it not as a decision-making body but more of a forum, a way for groups already organizing against the FTAA to exchange information and avoid reduplication of effort. It was something along the lines of a spokescouncil. Certainly they saw no reason for it to adopt an ideological “line” of any sort. For some reason, a lot of the arguments ended up aimed at trying to convince one person: a young woman named Julie, who worked for something called the Urban Justice League. Partly this was because none of us really knew her; she seemed fresh on the scene, but very enthusiastic, active, and eager to learn. Julie, on the other hand, turned out to be a creature of the NGO world, and she ultimately swung decisively to the ISO position. In fact, she soon began acting like a one-woman steering committee of her own, making phone calls to union presidents, pastors, and the leaders of various community groups in our name, and trying to assemble the broadest possible coalition. In theory, this was hard to argue with. But we all knew what was likely to come next: these same groups would start demanding we tone down the direct action, or at least stop talking openly about it. The DAN people and other anarchists responded by forming their own autonomous direct action working group of the coalition—calling it, appropriately enough, the “autonomous direct action working group,” or AUTODAWG—with its own listserv and separate meetings. AUTODAWG, we decided, would send one representative to the coalition meetings each week, but otherwise we would work together, much like we’d expected the original DAN working group to do.
The problem was that Julie and the ISO people immediately started showing up to all the AUTODAWG meetings too. Technically, of course, there was no reason they couldn’t—they were open meetings—but it caused great deal of discomfort on all sides. Julie started complaining on the Internet about exclusion and, before long, everyone agreed we really ought to have a special meeting to discuss process and iron things out.
The result was about twenty people all sitting around a table at a student hangout near Columbia University, sharing out slices of two large cheese pizzas, and trying to be reasonable to one another. Julie offered to facilitate (which probably was not a good idea). It soon became apparent that the main problem was lack of trust in one another’s instincts, since, in principle, the ISO side were making some very reasonable points. First of all, they said, consider the new people. There were a lot of new people, especially students, showing up wanting to do direct action. How exactly were they going to plug in and decide what working group they wanted to join if the direct action folk were meeting in an entirely different time and location? Secondly, if one is going to form a coalition that includes labor unions and organized community groups, and you do outreach, they will want to see some kind of mission statement. You can’t just tell them you’re against the FTAA. Of course, the anarchists in the room might have replied by asking what was the point in getting these endorsements anyway: none of these groups were interested in taking part in the action, and any group that might be interested in sending people all the way to Québec to march in the labor parade was almost certainly already making their own arrangements. So, why collect names just to have them on a piece of paper? But no one wanted to preclude the possibility that some new group might be pulled in and decide to take a more radical posture. So, instead, we ended up endlessly talking process.
Julie: For me, there are two issues: First, how do we integrate with the other organizations we’re outreaching to? Having them sign on to a mission statement is a tried and true method for doing that. Anyway, people at large, individuals who aren’t part of an organization, won’t be able to fit into a spokescouncil model. The second is how to avoid reduplication of efforts.
Moose: But the idea of a coalition is not to have an ideology; it’s a means for people with different ideologies or perspectives to work together on an issue.
Green: I want to know what an endorsement would mean in practice. Will unions distribute our flyer to their members? If so, that would facilitate individuals joining, as individuals.
Meredith (ISO): Well, the Outreach Working Group has already decided to write a statement and pass it to us. I guess the question becomes what does it mean to be part of the coalition?
Julie: Yes, exactly. When AUTODAWG formed, it was never clear to me if it was a part of the coalition or not. Then, when I showed up at one of their meetings I felt like I was crashing a party.
Enos: Look, I understand how you might have felt that way. But I think part of the reason it happened was because, every time we formed an autonomous direct action working group, it seemed like everyone in the entire coalition would show up. So we started asking ourselves: in what way are we autonomous? In what way are we a different group? Remember, this all started when DAN decided it wanted to work on the FTAA, and created its own working group. Then when all these people showed up, that working group effectively became this coalition. So DAN General was confused and we tried to create a new working group. And it just kept happening.
Marina: You should understand something about how DAN tends to operate, because some of the problem might just be confusion. The people we normally work with—the Lower East Side Collective people, Reclaim the Streets, Ya Basta!—all these groups see themselves as loosely part of DAN. We’re kind of halfway between a group and a spokes network. Reclaim the Streets people for instance, they never come to our meetings, partly because they’re more concerned with local New York issues, partly just because they don’t like meetings, they’re fun-loving party people, that’s part of their whole schtick. But they always show up to actions. So, really, this was a working group for that larger, direct-action oriented community. Some people didn’t want it to be a DAN working group, so we said, all right, let’s just call it an “autonomous” one.
Meredith: Maybe, just to float a proposal here, why not just make a list of working groups we can post on the wall during meetings, so that new people can plug in? How would people feel about that?
Marina: I thought we were here to brainstorm ideas to take back to our groups. I’m uncomfortable about making this a decision-making body. I mean, don’t get me wrong—that’s a constructive proposal…
James: She’s just suggesting we better articulate what we’re doing. Calling that “decision-making” seems just like a matter of semantics, from where I sit.
Enos: I don’t think it’s just semantics. I think the problem is the different nature of the groups involved.
Maggie: I just want to know what to say to people who want to join us…
And so on, apparently ad infinitum. I step out early, partly because, though I had my hand up frequently, Julie never once called on me; partly because several of us had told Starhawk we were coming over at eight. She was staying with a friend named Nesta in Columbia University Housing, just a few blocks away.
A much, much more pleasant meeting. Inspiring, even.
Just about anyone active in the movement had at least heard of Starhawk. She was a sometime science fiction writer (her most famous novel was about a war between San Francisco and Los Angeles), sometime author of works on feminist paganism, who had been involved in direct action campaigns since the late 1970s. Almost everyone had seen images of her, beating a little drum, leading spiral dances. A practicing witch, she had a reputation as a kind of den mother for the pagan cluster, many wiccans in their forties or fifties, but including many much younger members. Most of us came to the meeting highly skeptical. It was not just the automatic suspicions about movement celebrities, or even East Coast attitudes towards purportedly flaky Californians. The one thing most of us had read by Starhawk was a piece she had written in a widely circulated collection that came out right after Seattle, called “How We Really Shut Down the WTO,” in which she castigated the Black Bloc for refusing to take part in the spokescouncil, defying agreed-upon codes of conduct, and even spoke approvingly of pacifists who pointed out window-breakers to police. The piece, along with even angrier statements by NGO activists like Medea Benjamin, had set off a veritable explosion of rage from the more militant anarchists. Rage, eventually, had led to debate: over questions of solidarity, tactics, what activists owe each other on the streets. A lot of people had changed their minds, Starhawk among them, but at that time, her image had been fixed in everyone’s mind—especially because, unlike characters like Medea Benjamin, who could just be dismissed, she considered herself an anarchist—which gave the whole thing something of the color of a personal betrayal.
So, at any rate, we were suspicious. Still, we came. At least five of us: Moose, Marina, Rufus, Warcry, and myself. If nothing else, everyone was willing to admit Starhawk’s affinity group, the RANT collective, was doing excellent work giving trainings all over the country. By the end of the evening, we were pretty much completely won over.
Partly it was just that she so defied expectations. I don’t know exactly what we were expecting, but at the very least one imagines an anarchist witch would be at least a little bit outré. Instead, what we encountered was one of the most pleasant, reasonable people imaginable. Everything about her was open, friendly, and completely down-to-earth.
Starhawk was staying with her friend Nesta, a noted ecofeminist theorist and occasional Nation writer who was around the same age, currently getting around in an extremely high-tech wheelchair. She was curious about the direct action scene in New York. Moose talked about Ya Basta!, Marina about the People’s Law Collective, Rufus about the Action Medics.
Starhawk talked about her own experience, “I was one of those people who went to Seattle to do my civic duty and, after that, I expected I’d just get back to my life again. Here it is two years later and I haven’t got back yet.”
Nesta was quick to point out that it was not like she had no experience in this sort of thing. Really, they had got their start in the Diablo Canyon blockade in 1981. “Remember, how we had to invent all this stuff from scratch? We had no idea what we were doing, how to do things the present generation just takes for granted.”
“Oh, there’s been enormous progress,” Starhawk agreed. “I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen kids, sixteen, seventeen years old, and they’re already know how to do things it took us fifteen years to figure out.
“Well, if you want to know the history… I was basically an author back then. I had written several books on paganism, the Goddess religion. The network I’m with, Reclaiming, is based on a principle of Magical Activism—we wanted to use magic as a way of reshaping consciousness, to add a spiritual dimension that wasn’t simply Christian. Because, at first, it was only Quakers who really knew how to do any of this. Spokescouncils, affinity groups—all of that really started with the Clamshell Alliance, working against the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant in New Hampshire. There was this rebel Quaker group called Movement for a New Society that conducted trainings on nonviolence, but also taught this new mode of organizing—consensus, spokescouncils, how to make decisions democratically through small groups and then let them coordinate, bottom-up. And it worked so well that it just took off. At first, there was a kind of battle between the old and new ways of doing things. Most of those campaigns still had paid staff—the usual tiny underpaid staff, but paid staff nonetheless—and what were in effect steering committees, and there were always tensions between the top-down principle and the bottom-up.”
Mumbles of “it’s not exactly like such things never happen any more.”
“And, as I say, then there was the problem of—well, we used to call them the “Quaker fascists,” sometimes—whose kind of spirituality was almost completely alien to ours.
“I was part of a group we called the Matrix Collective, which was part of Reclaiming. We first got involved at the blockade in Diablo Canyon, which was this insane idea they had to build a nuclear power plant directly on a fault line in California, and then later with Lawrence Livermore Group, which was one of the main nuclear weapons labs at Berkeley. We wanted to use the same horizontal structure they’d used at Seabrook, but we also wanted to do ritual. In a way, that meant reinventing everything, because we soon realized that traditional nonviolent civil disobedience is deeply rooted in the ethos of Christianity—or anyway an extremely patriarchal version of religion. There was a reason there was always some male religious hero at the head of the movement. It’s all about chastisement, self-denial, being willing to subject one’s body to pain and suffering in the name of an idea—which is probably Truth or Love or something very nice like that, but still something abstract, transcendent. You negate the corporeal in the name of something higher. Which is what the big world religions are all about, really. So how do you square that with an immanent cosmology which celebrates the body and sees pleasure—especially sexual pleasure—as itself divine?”
She left the question open. “I don’t know if any of us have really figured that out yet. One idea we had was to pull sources of strength out of apparent weakness, to show how little homely things like yarn can, if woven together—sort of like a spell—stop even military machinery. Remember all those webs of yarn from A16?”
“Oh, you mean ones all over the intersections so you had to crawl under them to get back and forth between blockades?” I asked.
“That was the Pagan Cluster’s contribution. Actually the first time I remember using yarn was at a Bohemian Grove action sometime in the early eighties. They are the exclusive men’s club that includes CEOs and lots of Reagan’s cabinet—probably some of Bush’s but it seemed more urgent during the Reagan years. They have a club in downtown San Francisco and a fancy summer resort on the Russian River where every year they have a weeklong summer camp for the rich and powerful, which they begin with a ritual called the Cremation of Care, in which they burn the effigy of a woman. Their motto is “Weaving spiders come not here,” (I’m not making this up!) so we did a direct action where we webbed the whole Boho club in downtown SF and blocked them in.”
“That’s amazing.”
“Yeah, it’s funny,” I said. “I always used to assume it was just paranoid conspiracy.”
“Then probably the best web story ever was an action at Livermore in… ’82?’83 was it?”
“Oh, that was so hilarious!” said Nesta, who had just driven in from the other room. “I remember that story. The women had woven a long web, like a warp, wasn’t it?, on two sticks that could stretch across the road, wove in pictures of people’s kids, flowers, herbs, etcetera, and used it to block busses of workers…”
“And we had thought of it as a basically symbolic gesture, an artistic statement, really. Nothing that would actually be physically effective. We’d almost finished it and I remember there were these three bike cops sneering at us. Suddenly, they gunned their engines and decided to just plow through it. The next thing we knew, there we were on the ground, and there were the three cops on the ground, and there were their motorcycles, and we were all so hopelessly tangled together it took ten minutes just to cut us out.”
“Do you remember Bork, from the RNC in Philadelphia?” someone asked. “Remember, the one who appeared at the press conference the next day with two black eyes and her face all puffy? The reason they beat her up so badly in Philly…well, they had these cops on bicycles with big scissors. Every time they’d seen one of our banners, they’d hold the scissors out and drive their bikes right through them. Except Bork—obviously she had no idea they were going to be doing this—but she’d reinforced her banner with piano wire.”
“If they’d tried to peddle through on neck level they’d have been in big trouble. As it was, two of them got some nasty cuts. (I mean—they never would have if they hadn’t been illegally trying to destroy protesters’ signs.) But, anyway, so they got off the bikes and started smashing her head on the ground.”
Before long everyone was swapping war stories. Starhawk, as it turns out, was mad at the Black Bloc in Seattle mainly because they didn’t respect the collective process—they refused to even attend the spokescouncils. Since then, she had come to thoroughly embrace the principle of diversity of tactics. “We used to do nonviolence training,” she said. “Now we don’t even call it that any more. We give what we call direct action trainings, with classic nonviolence as just one element of a much wider repertoire. After all, it’s the refusal to cause harm or suffering to others that’s the moral point, especially from any spiritual perspective that makes sense to me.” Marina tried to suggest, gently, that she might seriously think about making this change of opinion on her part more broadly known.
One of the reasons Starhawk was anxious to meet with New York Ya Basta!, she finally admitted, was that she was a little worried whether that sort of tactic would translate across the Atlantic. She had first encountered Italian Ya Basta! before the actions against the IMF/World Bank meetings Prague in the fall of 2000. Prague was in many ways just extraordinary. She’d gone early to give trainings on consensus process, and ended up facilitating one of the big spokescouncils. “And it was one of those situations where… well, you know how it has to turn out. There were four different groups and two proposals. Either there would be four marches all starting in different places and they’d all converge somewhere, or there’d be one march and they’d all branch off in four. And there could only be one conclusion really: we’d start together, split apart, and hope, if everything went right, to eventually converge. But, of course, first we had to go through every possibility, every conceivable concern or objection for four, five hours, and finally you’d come up with the conclusion that everyone had to know we’d eventually come up with. By the end I was just exhausted, and practically saying, what’s the point of all this anyway? And then this Romanian guy walked up to me and ‘I can’t believe what just happened. I would never thought anything like that was possible—a thousand people speaking twelve different languages all in a room together, making a decision together, without leaders.’ He was just awestruck. Maybe we sometimes forget how revolutionary a lot of this really is.”
“So did you have much to do with Ya Basta! in Prague?” someone asked. This had been their debut on the larger European stage, and they had performed spectacularly, ending in a famous confrontation with riot police on a bridge leading to the Convention Center where the IMF was meeting, which all of us had watched repeatedly on video.
“Oh, yes. To be honest, at first they rather gave me pause. In part, it was the blatant sexism. For three days of meetings, there was one guy, Luka, who did all the talking. He spoke a little English, but mainly he spoke in Italian. Then there was a woman who did all the translation work—that’s three days of simultaneous translation, which I didn’t think anyone could do for three days without going crazy—and a third, also a woman, who just sat there taking notes. They never rotated, never switched roles. It was obvious both women spoke perfect English, too, but they didn’t venture an opinion once the whole time. Internally, within Ya Basta!, I couldn’t make out any kind of an internal democratic process either. Maybe there were things going on I wasn’t aware of.”
Then it came to tactics. After three days of meetings, Ya Basta! finally decided that their front line would be armed with two-by-fours. Starhawk began talking very slowly and precisely. “To beat against the shields of the riot cops. Not to actually hit them with. The idea was they could push through the police lines that way and they wouldn’t really be attacking the police.”
Eyes blinked.
Mouths opened.
“They really brought two-by-fours?”
“It took us days to consense on that.”
“Jeez,” said Moose. “I mean, okay… I can see the logic but… None of us have ever dreamed of doing anything like that.”
“To be honest,” said Starhawk, “I’m rather glad to hear it. Because when I first heard there were Americans intending to use Tute Bianche tactics, I was a little worried that people might get seriously hurt. You have to bear in mind that it took them five, maybe six years to get to the point where they could do something like that in Europe. Six years of continual media work, hammering away at the idea of the legitimacy of defensive tactics, endless media stunts. And you have to bear in mind that the media in Italy is a thousand times more sympathetic to social movements than the media here. Even on the TV, which is almost all owned by Berlusconi, Luka is up there every time there’s a big action, on talk shows, debating the police or rightwing journalists—things that would be inconceivable in this country.”
“Wow. You know, since I’m the one handling media for New York Ya Basta!,” I said, “I’ve actually been a little worried about that. We’ve considered various media stunts. But basically, the press here always let the cops frame the story—and there’s no way to even broach the subject of, say, the philosophy behind our actions. Believe me I’ve tried. There’s no interest. They just ask us if we’re going to be ‘violent,’ with padding and shields taken as evidence that we’re looking for a fight. We’ve been trying to create the same effect just by being over-the-top silly, with a kazoo band, silly crests, and costumes, so that if people just see us on TV and they’re calling us violent, it’ll be obvious there’s something wrong. But even then we know perfectly well, even if we all dress up as Barney the Dinosaur with our hands tied behind our backs, a good editor could still be able to come up with some image that’ll make us look frightening.”
“Plus, in almost all European countries, there’s a different relation with the police. Everybody knows each other. The whole thing is a little like a game.”
And so on. We drifted off to other topics, but Starhawk had registered her concerns. They had echoed some that had certainly occurred to me at one time or another. I had no idea if any of this was actually going to work.
This was actually the first meeting I’d attended with the Direct Action Working Group everyone had been complaining about.
It began with a report-back. Two Brooklyn activists had just returned from Québec City and were all agog over the beauty of the city, its ancient towers and anarchist graffiti. Then Mac went over breaking developments. He had stayed on at the meeting at the pizza place until the bitter end and done his best to patch things up with the ISO, who, in turn, now wanted to assure us they were completely committed to getting people up to Québec for the direct action on Friday, and not just the labor march the next day. The latest developments from Akwesasne were promising as well: the Canadian Union of Postal Workers was interested in helping, also some auto workers; Warclub, a Mohawk hip-hop band, wanted to be involved in some capacity; our Warrior allies on the Canadian side were already in contact with the Boots family, who were one of the most important Mohawk families on the US side and seemed interested, and so forth.
There were two main orders of business for the meeting itself. The first was the CLAC consulta: I end up being put in charge of coordinating the whole thing. Some discussion followed on the safest options: train, bus, car.
The other was an action planned for April 1. Enos, a local underground cartoonist had been taking point on this one with a friend named Nicky. They had also successfully managed to draft an activist named Twinkie, and this was a bit of a coup. Twinkie was an androgynous young woman whose parents were from Thailand, maybe nineteen or twenty years old with a dramatic punk haircut, famous for many things, but probably most of all for her enormous lung capacity. She was much sought after at demos for her amazing powers of projection, not to mention her knack for being able to invent songs and slogans for any occasion, on the spot. Such people are, as one might imagine, an enormous asset in any demo. In the past she’d largely avoided DAN, preferring to work with more community-oriented groups, but she had decided to throw herself into the FTAA organizing. She also had considerable experience in graphic design.
Enos: We figured that since NEGAN is going to be meeting on the 31st in Burlington, we could go up from there to the border the next day—which, of course, is also April Fool’s Day. It’s basically a kind of publicity stunt, a media thing, to bring people’s attention to the issues, but also to the fact that they’ve been systematically stopping political activists from crossing over into Canada. And not just turning away people with molotovs, but regular community activists.
Mac: Just last week they refused entry to Lorenzo Komboa Ervin—on the basis of some arrest thirty years ago.
Enos: If they think you’re political, they go through your record and all they need is to come up with one arrest, and they can deny you entry. It doesn’t even have to be a conviction. In some cases, they’ve been denying people entry just on suspicion.
This was, of course, part of the point of the police custom of making mass arrests of hundreds of people at a time during protests. The DC police were particularly famous for surrounding and trapping columns of hundreds of marchers, and then arresting them for “failure to disperse.” The arrests never hold up—they are obviously illegal—but, in the process, everyone is photographed and fingerprinted and this information is then put out on international databases.
Nicky: So, anyway, the idea is to do something to highlight the hypocrisy, since the FTAA is supposed to be all about eliminating border controls—except, of course, what they mean is border controls that affect corporations, not those that affect people. So, we figured we’ll have a bunch of activists dress up as the sort of products that will be getting through. I was going to go disguised as a dollar bill. Someone else was going to dress up as a genetically modified tomato… you get the idea. So when they stop us we can say, “We thought that was the only way we could get through the border.”
Twinkie: I was going to go as an HMO. Though I’m still not entirely sure how the costume is going to work.
Someone: Maybe an insurance salesman?
Enos: Anyway, so we could do some kind of skit based on that, throw a press conference while, in the background, the Canadian police are interrogating and beating up a bunch of vegetables. We’re in contact with some radical media people in Vermont who would definitely cover the story, and we’re hoping to get WBAI, maybe even Frontline for television coverage.
Mandy: You know, technically, if they’re excluding any American with an arrest record, that would include Bush, wouldn’t it? Maybe we could get someone to go as George W with a big “DWI” written across his forehead?
Steve: Doesn’t this all kind of depend on the assumption that they will, in fact, stop us at the border? What happens if they just wave us through? Just out of spite?
Nicky: You don’t have to worry about that. That’s not the way cops work. If the police are under orders to stop activists, then that’s what they have to do. The danger is more they might not even notice we’re activists. That’s what I’m worried about.
Enos: Well, we all know cops are dumb, but… I’m thinking, if they see some guy trying to cross the border dressed as genetically modified food, they’re probably going to figure out they’re dealing with an activist.
Gradually, the meeting becomes something more like a conversation. Two queer activists named Mandy and Jen are wondering if we are romanticizing these “Mohawk Warriors.” Aren’t we really dealing with people who aren’t even remotely on the same page as we are on issues like sexism or homophobia. Twinkie, Target, and Mac are all tripping over each other to respond, detailing the whole history of women’s councils and the constitutional niceties of the confederacy of the Six Nations. (Everyone, it seems, had been reading up on this.) “Actually,” Mac says, “one of the main accomplishments of the Warrior Society during the standoff at Oka was to revive the Clan Mother system as an alternative to the government-sponsored tribal government. By now, all the key decisions on the Canadian side are in the hands of women’s councils. One of Shawn’s hopes for Akwesasne is to start a similar process moving on the other side.”
Mandy is surprised, but guarded. “It sounds wonderful. But don’t you sometimes think it’s all just a little too good to be true?”
The thought had occurred to me as well—maybe all of us. It was hard to deny that, from the perspective of your typical New York anarchist, to have a bunch of Mohawk Warriors promise to open a bridge for you—let alone a bunch of Mohawk Warriors aiming to revive a matriarchal decision-making structure—was about the coolest thing one could possibly imagine. You can only wonder if it’s all just a little bit too cool.
An hour later, we were all strolling over to St. Mark’s place for drinks at the Grassroots Tavern. There was some kind of trash worship party in Brooklyn that night. Everyone was discussing whether it would be worthwhile to go. Mac and Moose get into a long argument about whether DAN was, at this point, an explicitly anarchist organization. Are there any explicitly non-anarchists in DAN? Or at least, other than in DAN Labor? No one is quite sure. Twinkie vanishes and reappeared fifteen minutes later with some Radical Cheerleaders and a huge pile of dumpster-dived sushi. Minor tensions ensued when some of them weren’t let into the bar for lack of ID. After a brief consultation outside, the matter was resolved somehow. Twinkie, on discovering I’m not a vegetarian, keeps handing me pieces of sushi with fish. Not keen on eating dumpster-dived sushi, I kept trying to hide them. She keeps noticing. Rufus gently explains that it’s really the exact same stuff one would have bought in the store twenty minutes earlier: there are laws about when sushi has to be thrown away and, half the time, the moment they put it out, there’s already an activist or local punk kid or two waiting to take it away again.
Outrageous article appears in the Toronto Globe and Mail, reporting rumors that Akwesasne Mohawks will be illegally “smuggling” activists with criminal records over the border into Canada. Apparently, Akwesasne itself has the reputation in Canada of being a den of smugglers—mainly of liquor and tobacco—so the implication is the same boats will be carrying a new criminal export—anarchists—presumably for money. Emails and phone calls are immediately exchanged about how to respond.
We merrily bash each other about. This time, Smokey has come up with a suit made out of empty plastic coke-bottles, which proves remarkably resilient against most powerful blows of our padded billy-clubs. We go through various defensive scenarios: How to hold the line if cops are simply trying to break through a shield wall. How to defend a specific individual they’re trying to snatch. One thing that is becoming obvious is that with all this gear, we’re going to need at least twenty minutes prep time before we can go into action.
There’s a long discussion of crests: we’ve managed to secure a fairly large number of surplus British riot police helmets from a mail-order catalogue (and each comes with two free rubber shin guards!), and spray-painted most of them pumpkin-orange. A plan has been floating around to personalize them by putting mock-heraldic devices on top: stuffed penguins, kewpie dolls, pinwheels, that sort of thing. The problem is, as Smokey points out, that this would individualize us: police could easily pick any one of us out for arrest if we no longer all looked alike. Would it be possible, perhaps, to have some kind of widget on top of each helmet so that one could plug and unplug crests at will? That way, we could constantly switch them around? But the project seems more trouble than we’re likely to put into it.
Announcements: There will be legal trainings in Burlington from 1PM to 5PM Saturday, probably one mini-training just for Yabbas.
Emma and Moose are away doing a street training.
Smokey and Flamma point out that, even without padding, a Ya Basta! formation could serve as a perfect diversion. During an anti-sweatshop rally two weeks earlier, six of us just put on the chemical jumpsuits. The moment we started suiting up, the top cop ran up and demanded to know what was going on and, throughout the subsequent march, we were surrounded on four sides by police at all times. We tied down the bulk of their forces just with the six of us.
I draft Sasha to join me at the Québec City consulta.
Another thing that emerged from the Thursday meeting was that, as “Minister of Information” for Ya Basta!, it was my job to fashion a press release responding to the Globe and Mail piece. After the meeting, I locked myself in my room with a laptop and, around 2 or 3AM, sent off a draft to the Yabba list for feedback:
From: the New York City Ya Basta! Collective
& the New York City Direct Action Network
On Thursday March 15, an article appeared in the Toronto Globe and Mail which misrepresented the results of an historic meeting between US and Canadian activists and traditional Mohawks from Akwesasne earlier this month.
Contrary to the article’s claims, there have never been any plans to “smuggle” activists (let alone “criminals”) across the border. Our intentions have been, from the beginning, public and above-board; public statements were released, among other places, through the NYC Independent Media Center ([[http://www.nyc.indymedia.org][www.nyc.indymedia.org]. ) and on the Internet. It is hardly our fault if reporters and police (who we had assumed were monitoring us fairly carefully!) could not be bothered to look up these readily available public documents.
After setting out the actual facts of the matter, it continued, using a lot of the language we’d developed in previous discussions within Ya Basta!:
WHY HAS THIS BEEN NECESSARY?
While we have always been open, the FTAA itself has been, from the beginning, a secret project, created by government and corporate elites with as little input from the public as possible. For this reason, its sponsors have regularly used international borders to prevent representatives of the public from coming anywhere near their meetings, even though these protesters are, in their opposition to the treaty, simply expressing the views of the overwhelming majority of the citizens of the countries these signatories claim to represent. During the OAS meetings in Windsor, Ontario last summer, which laid the groundwork for the FTAA, approximately two out of every three activists who attempted to cross the border from the US were prevented by physical force. In past months, activists trying to attend meetings in Québec have been turned back at the border, been detained, and been subjected to illegal searches and seizures. We have every reason to believe authorities are intending to use force to prevent environmentalists, union members, and other political dissidents from airing their opposition to the secret negotiations in Québec City in April.
AGAINST THE STUPIDITY OF BORDERS
The use of international border controls to squash political dissent is yet more proof that the process referred to as “globalization” is in fact nothing of the kind; as well as the absurdity of calling the vast international movement that has risen to oppose it in the name of global democracy an “anti-globalization movement.” It’s time to drop the propaganda and speak honestly about these things. If “globalization” were to mean anything, it would mean the gradual dismantling of national borders to allow the free movement of people, possessions, and ideas. Corporate “globalization” has meant the exact opposite: it has meant trapping the poor behind increasingly fortified borders so as to let the rich take advantage of their desperation. The number of armed guards along the US-Mexican border has more than doubled since the signing of NAFTA; refugees and asylum seekers languish like criminals in twenty-three hour lockdown; immigrant communities live in constant terror. We can only expect more of the same if NAFTA is extended to the entire Western Hemisphere.
Instead, Ya Basta! is calling for the abolition of national borders and recognition of a principle of global citizenship. We believe that every human being born on this planet has the right to live where she chooses, and not have her life chances be determined by some random geographical accident of birth. We hold that every human has an equal right to the basic means of existence: air, water, food, shelter, education, and health care. We want to see the authority of nation-states gradually dissolve and power devolve onto free communities on the basis of true economic and political democracy; a process that will lead to an outpouring of new forms of wealth and culture that the impoverished minds of the current rulers of the world could not possibly imagine. The Direct Action Network offers its own success as a rapidly growing continental federation, based on principles of direct democracy and decentralized consensus decision-making, as living proof that rulers—and this includes elected “representatives”—are simply unnecessary. Ordinary people are perfectly capable of governing their own affairs on the basis of equality and simple decency.
National borders were created through violence, and are maintained through violence. They are the remnants of a barbarous age that humanity must, if it is to survive, eventually overcome. We refuse to recognize their legitimacy.
FOR THE SELF-DETERMINATION OF COMMUNITIES AND MOHAWK SOVEREIGNTY
We are choosing to travel via Cornwall in order to express our solidarity with the Mohawk Nation and our recognition of its sovereignty over territories it occupied long before the US and Canadian governments even existed. Nothing illustrates the insanity of national borders more than the fact that the same governments that waged genocidal war against the Mohawks now claim the right to determine who can cross from one part of Mohawk territory to another. Our solidarity with our Traditional Mohawk sisters and brothers is rooted in our support for regional autonomy and communal self-determination in the face of the arrogant power of the state; but, also, in our profound respect and admiration for a Nation whose political contributions to the world—the creation of a federative constitution without a centralized state, the collective management of resources, respect for individual autonomy, the role of peacemaking, the political empowerment of women—provide, for many of us, visions of how a future just society might work that is far more compelling than the US Constitution, which was partially inspired by it. We wish to thank our Mohawk friends for their generous invitation and express our profound commitment to furthering their struggle for sovereignty, communal rights, and social justice, just as they have recognized our right, as world citizens, to make our presence known to the politicians who presume to act in our names in Québec City on April 19th–21st.
It ended with contact numbers for Ya Basta! (me), DAN (Eric), and the Mohawk Warriors (Shawn).
9PM, Saturday night there’s a huge Zapatista event. The EZLN had marched into Mexico City to lobby for an indigenous autonomy bill a month before, and the movie was already out. The showing was accompanied by report-backs from two DAN people who’d been there at the time.
Afterwards, parties. Powwow outside one of them about the press release. Time is of the essence, certainly, but (several ask) shouldn’t we have to clear this with the Mohawks before releasing it? Moose says he called Shawn and Shawn just said, “Well, we don’t ask you to approve our press releases.” Eric from the DAN Media Collective agrees to send them out by Blast Fax to every major news outlet in the country the next day, and a copy goes up on the web page.
It’s not clear if anyone ever read it. Certainly no one ever calls us back. All such grand statements simply disappear into the ether, just like all the op-eds and letters we regularly send out to newspapers before major actions. Then, the same media outlets who refuse to run them complain to their readers that it’s impossible to figure out what these anti-globalization types are actually for.
Another long meeting. Prolonged discussion on the current state of negotiations with Shawn and OCAP.
Mac urges DAN to endorse the Cornwall action: best, he says, to do so as quickly as possible before the next NEGAN meeting on the thirty-first to ensure people do go to the direct action rather than leaving with the union buses the next day. So we endorse it.
There’s a long discussion about a fund-raising party being planned at a place called the Frying Pan, about the Globe and Mail story and others like it, and, especially, about the media event planned for April Fool’s Day. An April 1 working group had already formed and hashed out the details:
Enos: That recent article in the Globe and Mail is actually symptomatic of the kind of press we’ve been getting. It’s all pretty much the same: we’re going to be violent, disruptive, we’re a bunch of hoodlums, not representative of anyone or anything, coming to set fire to the city. So, we were trying to figure out how to provide some more realistic images of who we are and what we’re about. That’s how we hit on the idea of doing an action with funny costumes, something silly and harmless. The idea was that we could time it for April 1st, which is not only April Fool’s Day, it’s the day that SalAMI is carrying out their “show the text” action in Ottawa. We show up at the border, we tell them politely that we’re going to join the protests in Ottawa; we get turned back; we hold a press conference. Explain to them this is what we have to do to get any media attention.
That’s pretty much it. To make this work, though, we’re going to need lots more people at the meetings. We only got three or four last time. I’m going as Bush, Nicky will be a dollar bill. Julie from the Urban Justice League is going to be a genetically engineered tomato…
Target: It’s too bad it’s on the first, actually, because that’s the day they’re having the men’s anti-sexism workshop at Charas.
Nicky: Oh, yeah. Oops. Well, hopefully it won’t be the last one.
I spend much of the next week trying to figure out exactly how one goes about renting a car (I don’t drive), making preparations for Québec. Several people say they might be interested in coming, but only one follows through: Dweisel, from the Free CUNY Collective. That makes four of us in one car. I skip the next week’s Ya Basta! meeting and head off the next weekend.
Herein lies the story of my first trip to Québec City. One strange thing about the months leading up to the FTAA actions was how our imaginative landscapes were constantly flipping back and forth. When Jaggi and his friends were in town everything was about Québec City and the wall there. After about a month of meetings in New York, all that had become ghostly, insubstantial; Cornwall, Mohawks, border actions, all seemed tangible and real. Over the next weekend, that all reversed again, and I came out of it utterly, completely determined to make it to the Summit. This determination was to create considerable strain with some of my friends, at certain points, but I never abandoned it.
The day was mainly spent driving. Me, Emma, Sasha, all from Ya Basta!, and Dean, from the Free CUNY Collective, set off from the city fairly early in the morning with a supply of vegan food and large collection of music cassettes.
Technically, Sasha, the filmmaker, was not actually going to the consulta but to an Independent Media Center conference going on a few blocks away at the same time. He also had the inestimable quality of enjoying day-long stints of driving, which was good because I didn’t drive at all. Emma, who was spoking for Ya Basta! despite the fact that she was going to do Black Bloc, was a budding artist, also in her twenties, known for installations around the city. A dedicated vegan, she worked in a health food store in Lower Manhattan. Dean was a grad student in sociology, tall, clean-cut, looking vaguely like a young Montgomery Clift. He started the trip famished, convinced us to stop for a considerable breakfast, and soon after started complaining of car sickness. I pulled a Dramamine from my medicine tin. He took it, nodded off almost immediately, and ended up spending almost the entire trip from the Hudson Valley to Montréal dozing in the back seat.
We made the border crossing without a problem, trying to look as clean-cut as possible. (Emma attempted to cover up the green parts of her hair with a little stocking-cap, and pulled a hoodie over the grungy Clash T-shirt, but we wondered if it was even necessary. American punk rockers, as Sasha pointed out, are quite regularly allowed entry into Canada.) Sasha, in the driver’s seat, explained that we were going to an Independent Media Conference, a claim made infinitely more convincing by the large expensive video camera sitting next to him (he had been occasionally stopping to do panoramic shots of the countryside). The border cops waved us on. We skirted through Montréal, staring at a gigantic folding map to the music of Professor Longhair, getting lost only once, marveling at the billboards advertising vacations in Cuba (the first dramatic evidence that we really are in a different country), and started the final, flat, rather dreary run to Québec as the sun began to set. We hit the city itself by early evening.
Navigating our way through the city itself is not easy. The city planners seem to have seen nothing wrong with putting three or four one-way streets in a row, all going in the same direction; they also didn’t seem to feel it was very important to put names on said streets, at least anywhere one might be able to see them. There’s also the fact that the CLAC driving instructions we’re using are exceptionally bad. Finally, we manage to locate our first stop: the Independent Media Center.
Actually, the IMC is a pretty standard first stop when you come to a new city because the place is almost never empty, and full of information. Technically, the building at which we arrived was not exactly the IMC but the CMAQ (Centre des médias alternatifs du Québec; it was pronounced “smack”), run by an NGO-funded, SalAMI-allied media group called Alternativs. This, at least, is what we learn from Madhava, sometime of the New York IMC, sometime camp counselor in Poughkeepsie, who we discover sitting hunched over a computer scratching a scruffy blonde beard. “The nice thing about Alternativs,” he says, “is that they have money. Oodles of it. We’ve got equipment coming out of our ears. The not-so-nice thing is they have an extremely traditional, top-down idea of journalistic organization: beat assignments, desk editors…that sort of thing. Of course, give us time,” gesturing towards the other old IMC hands huddled in a small meeting on the other side of the room. “We’ll democratize things.”
He introduces us to a tiny, slightly pixyish woman named Isabel, who then gives us directions. The next twenty minutes are spent trudging up a steep hill to the CLAC/CASA Welcome Center, in a beautiful old building with extremely heavy wooden doors, only to discover that the Welcome Center is really only a place to find housing and we actually already have housing lined up (everything had been arranged by phone with the CLAC people before we set out). Finally, around 10PM, after securing what we think are adequate directions, we return to the car and set off to meet our hosts.
Our hosts, as it turned out, lived in an extremely beautiful neighborhood, all cornices and chimneys and tiny shops set in the corners of nineteenth century apartment blocks. It looked vaguely like the West Village, but much less pretentious—partly, I thought, because positioned as it was across an insanely steep hill, it had never been seriously gentrified. I was later to learn this was the heart of Jean Baptiste, one of the few “popular” neighborhoods left in the high part of the town near the old, walled city, now mostly full of hotels and convention centers.
“Welcome, my revolutionary friends!” beamed the young man who greeted us at the door. He was surrounded by five or six young people practically piling on top each other to show their happiness at our arrival, but throughout the night, he did almost all the talking—presumably, because he was the only one with any sort of command of conversational English.
All in all, the group looked almost exactly like one would imagine a group of revolutionaries should look—at least, if all you knew was that they were from a place that was in some ways sort of like Europe, but in others sort of like Latin America. The one who first greeted us was tall, almost emaciatedly thin, with a beret and Mephistophelian beard. Soft-spoken in his uncertain English, he otherwise looked almost exactly like Leon Trotsky. His companion with a dark beard pulled off a plausible Ché Guevara; a third man, named Pascal, with a long pony-tail and Ché Guevara T-shirt was harder to call. He didn’t seem to correspond to any revolutionary hero I could remember, but I couldn’t help thinking, if there wasn’t one, there really ought to have been. (I asked myself: why do we assume that if someone has spent a good deal of time and energy ensuring they look exactly like we think a revolutionary should look, that in itself makes them somehow inauthentic? Most capitalists spend a great deal of time and energy into ensuring they look exactly like we assume capitalists are supposed to look like. No one suggests it makes them any less a capitalist.)
There were also two teenage girls in the living room who appear largely ornamental: they never say a word in our presence, even in French, though they invariably started talking the moment we leave the room. Later, we’re told they are both around seventeen years old and embarrassed by their lack of English.
The apartment contained two bedrooms, a large hammock, and several mats already spread out for sleeping bags. Our hosts were obviously used to multiple houseguests. Actually, it was a pretty typical student activist apartment: endless bookshelves, all the books in French, volumes of cartoons and poetry scattered around on second-hand furniture, mock religious posters, leftist magazines, a refrigerator largely full of left-over takeout. “You are hungry?” asked Trotsky. Emma asks if they have vegan food and Trotsky, assuring her there is, heads to the kitchen to find some.
“I shouldn’t have asked that,” she realized, as we stand around smiling at our silent companions. “I bet this is like Poland. If you ask people in Poland for vegetarian food, they think that means, not much meat. If you ask for vegan, they think that means ‘actually is vegetarian.’ Real vegan they’ve never even heard of.”
“Maybe we should have picked something up on the way,” said Dean.
“We probably wouldn’t be able to find anything at this hour anyway.”
Ché fetches wine, Trotsky brings out bread and charcuterie. It’s all extremely tasty. Emma samples some bread, looks suspiciously at the rest; later, when our hosts aren’t looking, sneaks off to another room, pulls out her backpack, and produces a giant vat of organic peanut butter and some pita bread.
Over wine, we explain we’re all anarchists, working with CLAC/CASA. Trotsky—actually, his name is Sebastien—explains that, yes, they understand that we’re connected to CLAC. Here, they are all Trotskyites—but, he’s quick to add, “not part of any sect.” They’re with GOMM (Group Opposed to the Globalization of Markets) and Sebastien is also with OQP (Opération Québec Printemps 2001), which was organizing logistics for the protests (it was pronounced “occupée,” appropriately enough considering they were planning various campus occupations). GOMM’s position is that it is critical to take part in larger social movements, even if they are reformist, so as to radicalize them. “Of course,” he continues, “in Québec, owing to the political situation, every group has to take certain positions: either you are for immediate independence, or you are for some kind of autonomy in coalition with working-class groups in English-speaking Canada. So we had to take a position. We are for complete independence. But we work mainly with student unions,”—which in Québec, Sebastien explained, is a slightly unusual situation because of the extremely weird form of the educational system here. In the 1960s, the longtime old-fashioned right-wing governor who’d ruled Québec for twenty years was finally voted out. He had felt no more than twenty percent needed higher education. The new Governor raised it to sixty or seventy percent. However, he took his model from California: not the system they have in California now, but a bizarre model used in California between 1954 and 1964 or so, where they take one year from High School and one from University to create a two-year Intermediate School. These Intermediate students, he explained, are actually still the most radical, much more so than the University students. And they will all be on strike for the FTAA. (Some will be occupying the colleges too.) They could turn out as many as fifty thousand, for the protests, if they mobilize fully. Probably they won’t. Well, they’ll definitely turn out at least twenty thousand. (The two silent girls represent this stratum.)
As the evening continues, more food appears, and effects of hunger are replaced by those of the wine. We all discover that we are really quite fascinated in the dynamics of Québécois socialist politics. Sebastien is happy and chatty. Others pop in and out. Talking to Sebastien is sometimes a little frustrating, owing to his typical Trotskyite habit of using the term “we” (“we don’t like to work with this group,” “we take a strong position on that”) without ever actually telling us what “we” meant. Usually, it didn’t seem to refer to GOMM. It seemed to refer to a much tighter Marxist organization that saw GOMM as part of a broader popular front, which, of course, it was their duty to build up to be as broad as possible. Therefore, they didn’t want to be too radical or too militant. But we never heard its name. Not that it really bothered us. Sebastien explained GOMM was not working directly with CLAC and CASA or attending their spokes (they seemed to be going to the SalAMI spokes instead), but planning its own action, a classic nonviolent civil disobedience, Seattle style, with lockdowns and blockades. They did, however, want to coordinate with CLAC to ensure they found an appropriate spot, which could be reserved for classic nonviolent civil disobedience. The best would be to blockade the one highway that leads up to the perimeter. He points to a map on the CLAC/CASA information pamphlet already lying on the corner of the table. “You see, here, in Zone H.”
“You mean down at the foot of the hill there?” Dean asks. “It’s extremely steep, isn’t it?”
Sasha confirms: “Yes, I think we passed through it five or six times when we were getting lost earlier in the evening.”
“Yeah. It’s far too steep to be appropriate for red tactics. It would be suicidal to try to charge up there.”
Sebastien wants us to put in a good word at the spokescouncil, and we, of course, agree. Conversation shifts back to the complex dynamics of anti-FTAA coalition building. Pascal produces a Xeroxed page with a kind of flow-chart, illustrating the three or four different labor confederations, umbrella groups, full of circles and arrows and alliances. The thing is you have such widespread unionization in Canada, compared to the US anyway, and so many unions are so militant. “Which, actually,” I say, “makes me think of some possibilities. Has anybody thought of talking to the hotel workers in the place the Summit is actually going to be held?”
Sasha nods vigorously. “Or more relevant, perhaps, the food handlers union.”
Sebastien smiles. “Yes, actually, there were some people talking to organizers for some of the workers in the Conference Center about the possibility of maybe putting laxatives into the big feast. It wasn’t even a serious discussion, just like putting out silly ideas. The very next day, the Summit organizers publicly announced that they would be using their own special caterers and all food would be flown in from another province.”
After breakfast, we drop off Sasha at the IMC and head to the spokescouncil, which is being held below the old city, in some kind of adult education building along a broad avenue called Réne-Lévesque. The spokes is only just getting started. The antechamber is a long hallway with vending machines, a little niche for drinking coffee, and a vast table full of activist literature.
On the table, endless stacks of papers. Arranged in neat piles are all the handouts one always sees, in any action: Legal Information, Medical Information, resources for independent journalists. There are also various calls for border actions, one for a feminist action, numerous informational broadsheets about the FTAA itself and the damage it will do to labor and environmental rights, replete with dramatic headlines and cartoon illustrations. Most are bilingual; a few are only in French. There are beautiful “Carnival Against Capitalism” posters available for a suggested ten-dollar contribution, unattended, with a bowl in front for the money. I pick up two, leave twenty bucks American. Towards the very end of the table is a priceless ten-page pamphlet called “The Summit of the Americas …. From the Bottom Up.” It explains who CLAC and CASA are, with a Plan of Action, Tour Guide for politically minded visitors, transportation information, URLs, and, crucially, a map of the city with an outline of the security perimeter, divided into zones. This is the one that was sitting on the table last night. I take two of them.
There’s also an enormous bowl full of homemade stickers, apparently free:
FTAA: free trade accords menace our forests.
FUCK Cars.
Don’t Fear Technology. Fear Those Who Control It.
No Government Can Ever Give You Freedom.
A Rich Man’s Heart is a Desert. An Anarchist’s Heart is a Kingdom.
It Didn’t Begin in Seattle. It Won’t End in Québec City.
HOLY SHIT! We’d better do something… End Corporate Rule! (with a cartoon of a gas mask)
THE MOST FUN YOU’VE HAD SINCE SEATTLE: QUÉBEC CITY. (with another cartoon of a gas mask)
Get Your Hands Off Our Bodies. (with a picture of a naked female torso)
Armed and Dangerous. (with a cartoon image of a scary-looking cop)
No Matter Who You Vote For, I’m Still Here. (with a cartoon image of an even scarier-looking cop)
Along with these are a variety of tiny colorful buttons, suggested donation of fifty cents, with CLAC’s lovable raccoon mascot, fist in air. (Anarchists have a thing for small furry animals, particularly if they live underground.) No T-shirts, though. Dean picks up a couple buttons. Then we go in.
Inside is a very large room which seems to normally be used for dance recitals, or maybe gymnastics. There are polished hardwood floors and one wall is made entirely of mirrors. There are already about a hundred fifty to two hundred activists sitting in a giant circle amidst endless piles of coats and other gear. Near the door is a registration table, attended by a young woman with a box full of squares of colored paper, who assures us that the meeting has only been going on for at most twenty minutes. Whispered clarifications: anyone attending the meeting can speak, but only spokes can actually vote. Each collective or affinity group is allowed up to two votes, indicated by paper squares. Have our groups empowered us as spokes? Yes? She hands us our two pieces of paper, one red, one blue. “Oh yes,” she says, “I almost forgot. None of you are working journalists or in any way connected to law enforcement?”
“Well, you know, we have to ask.”
As the spoke from NYC DAN, Lesley has already joined the circle, along with her ride, an activist named Lynn, also from New York, who works with Rainforest Relief. Hugs are exchanged all around. The two have already constructed a little nest of documents, coats, sweaters, thermoses, and the like on their section of the floor. I take out my field equipment, which consists of a cheap CVS three-subject notebook and a very expensive rapidograph (technical pens: I like them because you don’t have to apply any real pressure in writing so your hand doesn’t cramp even if you have to write for hours, which, in such meetings, I usually did). I unpack a couple of cashmere sweaters to be used as pillows, my contribution to the nest, and everyone starts whispering.
The first question is inevitable. “So what’s all this about voting? What kind of process are they using here?”
“Well, that’s interesting,” explains Lesley. “CLAC is kind of weird that way. As for CASA, they’ve never organized a spokescouncil. I mean, I think they’re doing really well for people with no experience.” Basically, she said, activists in Québec City have had, until very recently, no real experience with consensus process at all; they’re learning this completely from scratch. But they’d already made enormous progress, having moved in the last few months from using a majority vote system to a sort of semi-consensus system, in which, if they fail to find consensus on the first go, they move to seventy-five percent super-majority vote. It ends up working about the same as full consensus would. Most of the people facilitating this meeting are from Montréal, however, and some of them are very experienced facilitators. “CLAC also uses a rather unusual system for taking turns—it’s a little controversial—where they insist on strict gender equity. For every contested proposal, they alternate between one woman speaking in favor of the proposal, one man in favor, one woman speaking against the proposal, one man against. In practice, it turns out a little bit more a rule of thumb than a strict practice, but it’s a useful way to make sure no one can forget the underlying principle.”
The process, she goes on to explain, is a bit more formal than we’re used to. This is, in part, because this is technically a consultation, not a spokescouncil properly speaking: the local organizers are coming up with the broad framework for the action, but they want affinity groups coming from outside the province to give them some advice. Also, they want to get some idea of what those outsiders are intending to do. Therefore, the plan is to move quickly from the general meeting to a breakout session, where we’ll divide into small, manageable groups and each take on a series of questions provided by the organizers. At the end of the breakout, everyone will explain just what their affinity group was thinking they would actually be doing during the Summit. This will become the basis on which the facilitators can construct a list of different sorts of action (blockades, street theater, etc.), which, in turn, will then allow for a further breakout, allowing people to consult in small groups with those who intend to do roughly the same sort of thing. After which there will be dinner and a party, and the next morning we’ll reconvene for a final plenary.
In most spokescouncils, there are two facilitators: one male, one female. In this one, there are four. This is mainly because of the language problem: the local CASA folks seem to speak only French; the Montréal activists switch back and forth according to no logic I can decipher; everyone else is speaking English. So, there are four people sitting on chairs at the head of the circle: two, apparently, who are actually facilitating, two just to translate—though, in practice, I observe (I have my notebook out most of the time, scribbling observations furiously) they seem to periodically switch. Except for Jaggi, who is clearly trying to keep himself in a merely auxiliary role.
As we came in, the facilitators were fielding a request by a radical video team to record part of the proceedings; after hearing the usual objections, the proposal is reframed: we will invite them to come back later in the afternoon, when we are not discussing action plans but only logistics, and then put it to a vote again. (In the end, of course, there is too much opposition.) A woman from CASA, who I think was called Celine, began by summarizing the information already printed in the handouts.
Celine[6]: These color blocs are not fixed, and they will not necessarily be physically separate, though we will have one area reserved for the Green Bloc. They are:
The Green Bloc is the more artistic, festive style of demo, where there is no risk of having to defend themselves.
The Yellow Bloc is obstructive. This is classic nonviolent civil disobedience. It is defensive, nonviolent: blockades or attempts to occupy ground, for example, which involve a definite risk of arrest.
The Red Bloc is disruptive. This is the disturbance bloc, which will try to disrupt the Summit, where participants should be aware of a high risk of repression and arrest. We are expecting creative, diverse styles of disruptive action here.
We emphasize “disruption” because, from early on, CLAC and CASA came to the conclusion that, given the constraints of the security fence and massive police mobilization, attempting a repeat of Seattle and actually trying to shut down the meetings was a strategy unlikely to succeed. We decided on an alternative strategy, which combined efforts to disrupt the Summit, with efforts to create Temporary Autonomous Zones, liberated territories throughout the city.
CLAC and CASA have developed a series of proposals about the actions themselves that we would like you to consider. [She begins translating from a page in French]:
On Thursday, April 19th, we are proposing a spokescouncil at 3PM, of everyone who’s here by that time, to finalize details of the action. That same night, we are proposing we hold a torchlight parade. This will be a Green action, our goal is not to be arrested before the 20th, but to welcome the Summit, as it were. We just want to specify again: this is a demo, not a confrontation. It will stop as soon as the cops appear. Just a way to say “hi” and begin to mobilize our people. Those are the only goals for that day.
[Various people have questions.]
Facilitator: Can we go through the whole schedule and only then go to questions?
Celine: On Friday the 20th, the Carnival Against Capitalism march will assemble on the Plains of Abraham at noon, and then people can choose where we go. At roughly 2PM, everyone will disperse into their own blocs and types of action; there may be a march but we have not organized one yet because we don’t know what the security situation will be like.
Now, bear in mind: everything we’re presenting here can be modified. These are just proposals. Right now, we are also proposing that at 6PM Friday the 20th we hold an assembly to go over the day’s events and plan for the next.
On Saturday the 21st, we will participate in the big labor demo as an explicitly anti-capitalist contingent. We will however, respect the organizers’ parameters during the march. So, this is not, itself, an occasion for direct action.
That evening, a lot of demos and diverse actions could go on, and of course jail solidarity actions.
Sunday the 22nd will be the same: there will be space for different actions, but also for prison solidarity.
So… back to the 20th. What CLAC and CASA have sort of organized is two different demos, Yellow and Green. If you look at the handout, you will see, on the right of page two, both proposals. Both assume the existence of a free zone, in which there will be very limited risk of arrest [some skeptical laughter], a place for Green, creative demos. It will be a fixed location, a free place where everything will be beautiful. At the moment, assuming we assemble on the Plains of Abraham at noon, we have two possibilities. It’s a little vague because we don’t know where exactly the security perimeter will be, but basically, one is that the Yellow Bloc will break out of the Plains and march directly to carry out a carnivalesque action in front of the security perimeter; the second is that we begin together with the Green Bloc on the Plains of Abraham and carry out a much longer march which would snake through the city, allowing the Green Bloc to split off, and then arrive in the same place some hours later.
In either case, the ultimate goal is a gigantic, marvelous carnival, with both small affinity group actions and bigger collective ones—we need all of you!
Oh yes, and for the longer, march—we could also rearrange its path depending on smaller actions, to be in solidarity with them.
Again, we urge people to respect different blocs and decisions of people taking part to ensure a level of unity and solidarity.
Question: During the breakout sessions we are having after, could you ensure there’s one person from either CLAC or CASA’s action committee in each workshop to answer questions?
Celine: Yes, we’ve already arranged for that.
Facilitator: So, does anyone have any clarifying questions about any of these proposals? We will be alternating between men and women.
There were, of course any number of questions: about the actual extent of the security perimeter, roads from the airport, the possibility of pre-emptive arrests during the Thursday torchlight parade. (Answer: this sounds like an important concern, but we’re doing clarifying questions now.) Was the organizing committee aware that the official opening of the Summit might be moved to 1PM?
Man: I’m puzzled. What sort of solidarity can the Red Bloc expect from the other blocs? It seems like this whole issue is being left out. I need to report back to people in Toronto and I have no idea what to tell them.
[Lesley to me: “That’s my question too.”]
…as they’ll be the ones needing support. It seems to me this whole bloc idea needs to be fleshed out a bit more.
Celine: I agree we need to do this. That’s why we’re here.
Facilitator: I don’t want to be a castrator [laughter] but we have twelve people on stack, this is the time set aside for the technical questions on the plan of action, not theoretical questions.
The problem was that it was almost impossible to answer any of the technical questions without having a more precise idea what this color scheme would look like on the ground. And clearly it had not been thoroughly hashed out.
Man: A point of clarification. The Green and Yellow Blocs have specific marches. Do I understand the Red does not?
Celine: Yes. CLAC and CASA are working on organizing the Green and Yellow Blocs, but the Red Bloc actions should be discussed in small affinity groups, not general assemblies of two hundred people like this.
Woman: In the introduction, you referred to the blocs not as geographical entities, but as attitudes. But a lot of the questions I’ve been hearing make it sound like they really are going to be separate groups in separate places. Is this just a product of confusion? Or has this been completely worked out? [A pause as the facilitator asks for more detailed translation.] That is to say, if the Red Bloc were near the perimeter in a geographical sense, and the Yellow Bloc wanted to do some kind of nonviolent direct action… well, clearly, people will want to do that near the perimeter too. So it raises a question about the zones. Will we be dividing up the map of the city by color?
Celine:: Well, the Green Bloc will be geographically delimited. It will be relatively far away from the perimeter.
Nicole [a CASA person, the one who was in New York, steps in to clarify]: The Yellow Bloc will be more mobile than the Green, delimited not so much in space as in the types of action it can engage in. The best way we’ve found to help those who intend to be in the Red Bloc is to organize the Green and Yellow as best we can, so the people who’ll want to do Red will know our plans and arrange to do their actions elsewhere.
Woman: The problem as I see it is, if Red and Yellow Blocs are mobile and defined by attitude, how will people know what Bloc they’re even in? Will there be separate marches, armbands, some equivalent of marshals who can tell you?
Nicole: That’s definitely something we should try to clarify. Remember: Yellow doesn’t confront, but is defensive. But that also depends on the attitude the cops take. If the police carry out an all-out assault, if they begin attacking everyone indiscriminately, then presumably everyone could end up in the middle of a de facto Red zone.
Celine: We cannot make any absolute assurances to anyone about what anyone else will be doing. But we’d like people to call out what sort of actions and demos they intend to be carrying out, what color code best fits that, and will expect them to try to stay that color as well as they can. But we know Yellow can slip into Red.
Nicole: I’ll add that this is where affinity groups become crucial. If this happens your affinity group could decide collectively to leave the area. Communication will be very important here.
Conversation continued in a similar vein for another fifteen minutes. No one was quite sure what all this would really look like, and it seemed the planners had left large parts of the picture intentionally vague. The CLAC plan was, essentially, to solicit our collective advice to fill in the details. Hence, the structure of the meeting. After the first plenary, where we just got to ask clarifying questions, we were to break up at noon into randomly selected smaller groups of roughly twenty people each. These smaller groups would be given the same list of issues to discuss; each would be provided with someone from the CLAC or CASA planning team to answer informational questions. The results would be written down and serve as a resource for the local working groups. Finally, everyone at the session would explain what role their affinity group was planning on taking on during the actions themselves: whether they were coming as artistic groups, support groups, flying squads, and so on. These would be used as the basis for a second round of breakouts, in which everyone would get to coordinate things with representatives of other affinity groups intending to do roughly the same thing. After that, we’d go home for the evening and hold a final plenary Sunday afternoon.
Lunch was on the fly. We grabbed plates, scooped out some sort of large casserole and salad, a cup of cider, and took it with us to the rooms where the breakouts were being held downstairs. We were mostly assigned different rooms, of course, though somehow Lynn and I both ended up in the same one: Group Five.
Downstairs were a whole series of small rooms that had the feel of seminar rooms, big tables, fluorescent lights, mostly without windows.
I will include a fairly long extract from my notes here. Hopefully, they’ll convey something of the texture of a consensus meeting—particularly, of the somewhat swirling quality conversation takes when stacking speakers ensures participants rarely reply directly to one another’s points, and discussion seems to circle around its object rather than immediately attacking it. What follows is pretty typical of such discussions. I will label individuals roughly as they appeared in my notes, since for the most part, I did not write down their actual names. Also, though the conversation was bilingual, with translations provided—I’ll restrict myself here to English, only providing the translations of statements originally made in French.
According to my notes, Group Five originally consisted of twelve men and ten women, though two more women later drifted in. The CLAC person assigned to our room was named Radikha, a willowy young woman of South Asian descent. She was already seated as I came in, chatting with a friend who worked with the Toronto IMC.
Radikha: So, the facilitators have asked each group to consider three questions in this first break-out session. First, the protection of the Convergence Center. Second, the attitudes each bloc (Red, Green, and Yellow) will take towards the police. Finally, what sort of actions your affinity group is thinking it will take part in.
Bob: Hi, I’m Bob from the Toronto IMC. Is it okay if I facilitate, so as to leave Radikha available for answering questions?
Radikha: That would be just fine with me. I guess then I can be the notetaker, too, since the organizers want to have a record of everything each group comes up with.
Meredith: Also, do we want to set time limits on each agenda item?
[Many nods and affirmative noises]
Should we select a time keeper, then, or does everyone have a watch? [Various people do not have watches]
Another Woman [to Meredith]: Would you be willing to do it?
Meredith: All right then, I’ll be time keeper.
Facilitator: So, what do we have, until 1PM? That’s forty-five minutes. Shall we say ten minutes for the Convergence Center question? [To Radikha] Is there any background we should know?
Radikha: Well, within CLAC, we came to a decision to create a Convergence Center, a place to hold meetings and for people coming in from out of town. We also decided to organize some kind of defense in case the police attack. The question is how to organize that, and how to let people who want to leave get out. For example, will there be surveillance outside? And… well, also I guess some of us have been talking about some sort of surveillance inside to prevent police provocations inside the Center. How do we organize this? We don’t have much experience with these things and we were hoping some of you might be able to help.
[The facilitator is taking stack as various people around the table catch his eye, nod slightly, or otherwise indicate they wish to be put on the speaker’s list. He calls on people, pointing mostly, since few of us know each other’s names.]
Woman: So, CLAC did make a decision. Now you just need some advice?
Older Guy: My question is: before we talk about vigilance and protection, shouldn’t we also be talking about decentralization? What exactly is going to be happening at the Convergence Center? Are people there going to be covering everything from finding people housing to press conferences to food or providing art spaces? And if so, is it tactically wise to concentrate all those functions in one place?
French Guy: When will the Convergence Center actually be set up? [We all start looking at the handout, but there’s no indication.]
Radikha: In response to the centralization question: by “Convergence Center” we mean a meeting place to hold spokescouncils, also to welcome people, place them in housing, that sort of thing. We haven’t decided what other functions the place might serve. As for the date, we don’t know that yet, but it certainly will be up and running by Wednesday the 18th.
Younger French Guy: What about the giant puppets? Will they be made in the same place?
Radikha: I think some smaller puppets may be made there, but the larger puppets will be someplace else.
Facilitator: This is a small group so I’m not going to be using the strict one man, one woman rule here, but I’ll still try to maintain gender equity. So let me skip ahead in the stack now… the woman in the red scarf?
Red Scarf: My affinity group is intending to give direct action trainings before the Summit: will it be possible to do that at the Convergence Center?
Radikha: I imagine the Convergence Center will be available for trainings.
American: At J20 [the inaugural protests], we had not one but a series of very decentralized Convergence Centers, and that worked really well. Also we had signs up everywhere saying “No Drugs or Bombs Allowed,” that sort of thing, which apparently—I know it sounds stupid—makes it a little harder for the police legally to just crash in. Also, we were very careful about hiding the puppet warehouse.
Radikha: So, I’m hearing a lot of concerns about the puppets. Do you think we should have an entirely separate place for puppet-making?
Lynn: I’m actually fearful about using the inauguration protests as our model. At the inauguration, it was pretty clear the police didn’t want arrests; several cops actually told me that after they detained me.
Someone: If they didn’t want arrests, why did they detain you?
Lynn: I took off my clothes at the inaugural ball with a slogan across my chest. But even then they just let me go after half an hour or so.
Someone else: Jeez, how did you get tickets to the inaugural ball?
Facilitator: Um, maybe we should bring ourselves back to the proposal: what shall we do about defense and evacuation?
Anglophone Guy: It seems a little silly to devote a lot of resources to defending an empty building, Maybe it’s important—if we really do want to defend this space—to ensure there’ll be something going on there all the time, I mean, when the spokes aren’t meeting. Otherwise, you’d just be tying people down. Perhaps we could offer continual trainings, for example.
[Brief problems with translation. We pause to make sure the French speakers on one side of the room are caught up.]
French Guy: It seems to me that the major reason law enforcement has invaded convergence spaces in the US is to destroy the art and puppets, so as to kill the message the protesters wish to convey. They haven’t messed much with spokescouncils or meetings. So it seems to me what’s really important is to defend the puppet space—wherever that will be—and if the puppets aren’t being built in the Convergence Center, then maybe we shouldn’t be defending it at all.
Facilitator: Can I just check for consensus: we seem to be talking about how and what to defend, not whether…? So: are we agreed on that? Any disagreement that we do in fact want to defend the space? That this is even a priority?
Suzette: My name is Suzette and I’m with the student movement. We’re going to be on strike during the Summit, and we need our people in our own space…
Facilitator: I’m sorry, Suzette, we still have a stack here. You’re talking out of turn.
Suzette: Oh, sorry. I guess I’m just saying sure, let’s defend the space, but don’t expect the Québec Student Movement to be able to dedicate any resources to this.
Second French Guy: I like the idea of ensuring people will be able to leave if the place is besieged. But: is it a Yellow defense or a Red?
Facilitator: Can I have a time check here?
Meredith: We’re actually fifteen or twenty minutes over time already.
Facilitator: And we have five people left on stack. Shall we make these the last comments and then move on?
[nods]
Red Scarf: Can’t we make some of the puppets in the Convergence Center, and some elsewhere? Just to be on the safe side?
[General twinkling][7]
Facilitator: So it seems we have consensus on that.
[More twinkling. Radikha is scribbling rapidly.]
Lynn: In LA, we made a very successful legal move beforehand to defend the Convergence Center. We knew that, when the cops attacked our spaces in Philly and DC, their excuse was that the places were fire hazards, so that was part of our defense: we asked people not to bring certain things, which they could say were fire hazards, but most of all, we got legal assurances beforehand that they wouldn’t come in.
Francophone Guy with Sideburns: Wait a minute: are you actually suggesting we could get an order of protection from a judge, and that would make it legally impossible for them to make a preemptive attack like they did, say, on the puppets in Philadelphia?
Lynn: There was a legal injunction.
American: I really can’t see how that could work. After all, at A16 and Philly, the cops didn’t exactly say, “We think this is a fire hazard” and close us down. They claimed there were molotovs and bombs inside. It’s not like there actually were any. They just lied. So, I don’t see why we’re assuming that whether we actually have anything dangerous in there has anything to do with it.
Facilitator: I think we’re having serious process problems here. People are jumping stack and anyway we’re long since over time. Radikha, do you have an answer to his question? Has anyone looked into legal possibilities?
Radikha: Actually, no. We haven’t looked into any of that yet, since we’ve been too busy locating a space. Anyway, the laws are different here.
Meredith: Maybe we should have legal people on hand. In Philly, there weren’t any legal people around when they attacked the puppet space—and, anyway, the puppet space was a huge warehouse out in the middle of nowhere with no other buildings anywhere nearby, so there was no way to do a blockade. So, if you’re still looking for a space, that might be something to think about. We can also make sure there’s material for a lockdown on hand here. Also: a way to get the media down there immediately if something happens.
New Englander: You do realize we’ve only got twenty minutes left for the whole session and we still haven’t got off question number one? I’d also like to suggest that the language being used here—Red, Yellow, the vagueness—is a real impediment to action. Perhaps, for the sake of time, we should just come to consensus about what we’ll actually do if the cops do attack us. That might actually help us move on to the next topic—wasn’t it supposed to be, attitudes towards the police in the different blocs? Come to think of it, we really should have addressed that first, then moved on to talking about the Convergence Center.
Radikha: Well, the organizers sort of took it for granted we wouldn’t really be able to do all this in an hour. I want to add that Yellow is supposed to be characterized by a “defensive attitude”: blockading is Yellow. If your group does not intend to respond to police orders, you’re Yellow. Of course, your affinity group can decide for itself how to act when cops attack, there’s no code saying “all Yellow affinity groups have to do this.” Red is more… targeted.
Older Guy: Though not necessarily violent.
Radikha: No, not necessarily.
Red Scarf: In the interest of moving on, I propose we classify the Convergence Defense as Yellow. You know, technically, we’re not supposed to be planning Red actions here anyway.
By 12:45, we concluded that this was about as far as we could go without even knowing where the Center was going to be or what it was going to be used for, so we finally moved on to defining the blocs. One woman said her affinity group was intending to come with plexiglass shields. Would this still count as Yellow? Radikha assured her it would, since shields are by definition defensive. Lynn claimed that, in America, cops had definitely been known to interpret defensive gear as weapons.
The problem with the blocs, it turned out, was whether to interpret them geographically. A Green zone made no sense unless it was physically separate. You need to give people a safe space, far enough from the action that they’re not in danger of being mistaken for combatants, close enough that they’re clearly part of the same event. To mark off a specific space for a red zone, on the other hand, would be clearly suicidal. You might as well put up sign saying ‘police, here are the ones to arrest.’ So we were stuck with one Green zone, in some specific area out of the action, and the rest of the city a vast Yellow zone, any part of which might turn Red at any time. But if so how would it be possible for anyone to do classic civil disobedience? You can’t claim to be engaging in a nonviolent sit-in if, at any time, someone else might pass by and chuck a brick over your head. Out of a sense of obligation to our Trotskyite friend, I suggested that perhaps certain zones, maybe of a block or two, might be set aside for purely Yellow actions. I was a bit startled to hear loud and vehement objections. For a couple of minutes, I found myself cast as the reactionary, with many of the local activists—including the woman from the Student Movement—angrily rejecting any notion that Red tactics would be declared off limits, anywhere. I withdrew the suggestion: “Well, probably groups will simply cluster spontaneously. Maybe we don’t need to actually formalize any of this.”
Facilitator: Let’s move to the third question: specific action ideas. Anyone have any objections to just doing a go-round here? [None are indicated]
Suzette: We’re not supposed to be talking about Red stuff here?
Facilitator: Yeah, that’s my understanding of the situation. Only actions we would be able to discuss in a completely public space.
Older Guy: I’m with the Pagan Cluster, which is concentrated in Vermont, and we’ve come up with a proposal for an action based on the Cochabamba statement, about access to water as a basic human right. We want to create a Living River of people that can flow through different zones in the city, trying to cause as much disruption as possible as it does so. That might include actions around the central zone near the wall, where we assume things will turn the reddest, but it’s basically a Yellow sort of action we have in mind here.
Radikha: I’ll skip my turn as basically I’m going to spend the weekend doing support work for protesters. (You know, I’m with CLAC.)
Olive (French student with rainbowish hair): I don’t know if my affinity group will be doing an action or support.
Sideburns: We want to disturb the summiteers as much as possible. We have nothing specific beyond that yet, but we’ve been throwing around the idea of blockading the highway to the city.
Jane: My name’s Jane. I’m actually spoking for two different groups. One group is from Carleton University and will be doing disruptive street theater—clowning sorts of things. We’ll show up and wander around, and we have these little skits we can put on the moment we see something. The other group is the SSSA, from Ontario. That’s a group of secondary school students. They’ll be doing drumming with found instruments and blockade sorts of thing.
English Guy: I’m representing two affinity groups based in the University of Toronto that are also doing theatrical skits, but want to be in the Yellow Bloc, not the Green. Also, in Toronto, we have the Guerilla Rhythm Squad. Some of them want to get involved in any possible airport actions but don’t know if those are still on.
David: I’m with New York City Ya Basta! We have four or five ideas for action scenarios, none of which can be discussed here. Well, I guess there’s one we can discuss. Some of us had an idea to come out, suited up in our padding and chemical jumpsuits, and get a really large ladder, and just kind of wander around with it right next to the wall. If nothing else, it would work as a diversion. We find that whenever we show up in the suits, cops tend to follow us wherever we go.
Young Québécois Woman: I represent a popular neighborhood committee in the neighborhood of St. Jean Baptiste—this is a neighborhood that is going to be cut in half by the wall. We’re planning a series of actions on the 17th and 18th having to do with that. Can we discuss those here?
Facilitator: Sure, why not?
Young Québécois Woman: Well, this is still in the planning stage, but one idea is that people in the neighborhood will save their garbage for a week, and then throw it along the wall to show this is what consumer society produces. And there are two more. One is putting lines of old clothing along the perimeter (the theme of waste again), the other is noise. So as to disrupt the Summit, twice a day everyone will put on music as loud as possible—something really annoying, and all at once, to try to drive the delegates crazy.
Young Francophone Guy: We are planning to take part in border actions at Akwesasne, but nothing concrete beyond that.
Plexiglass Guy: My collective in Toronto is organizing communities to do massive border actions, too. After that we’re coming to Québec with our shield wall. We might actually help with the Convergence Center defense if people really do end up needing that.
Lynn: I’m with Rainforest Relief in New York. We have some people coming from Ecuador, Nicaragua, who can talk about the potential effects of the FTAA on their communities. We’re hoping to do a panel and then take them up to the Mohawk action—though I’m worried whether we’d be putting them in danger if we actually try to cross. In Québec itself… well, my hope is that we rush the wall in some way. Maybe completely nonviolently. I have this very powerful image in my head from the movie Gandhi of all those people marching up to the soldiers, and getting clubbed down, but then, more people keep coming and though each one ends up getting hit, they just keep coming anyway… Or maybe like that except we’re climbing.
Bob: I’ll also be doing Indymedia, covering the heavier actions.
Man in Blue Bandana: I represent Québec Medical, and we’ll be giving support before, during, and after the actions. We are trying to work with people to make sure we have medics at each of the border actions as well, but that’s a little more complicated.
Older Woman: I’m also from the Vermont Mobilization. Our aim is to move folks across the border, but we’re also trying to come up with scenarios for what to do with people if they don’t make it.
Facilitator: Okay, time’s up.
Someone asks if we are also supposed to be discussing the march: whether we’re going directly from the Plains of Abraham or snaking through the city for an hour first? “Well, no,” says Radikha, “but it looks like a lot of breakout sessions are still going on (yes, we flagrantly lied about the time). People aren’t going upstairs yet, so we could certainly talk about that a little if people want to.” Sentiment is clearly leaning towards the longer march (is it really a good idea to have everyone about to do a direct action assemble and just hang out in one place for several hours before they do anything?), when someone comes downstairs to tell us the breakout sessions are over.
In the hall, I run into Lesley. We compare notes. Most of her session was also wasted on meandering discussions of Red and Yellow. Only at the end did anything useful come out. Dean had a similar experience. Emma appears to have vanished. As I head upstairs, several people point me out as the Ya Basta! delegate—I’m getting the definite impression there’s a feeling this is going to be the big new innovation for this action: shields and padding and defensive tactics. (As it turns out they’re wrong; it won’t be. But it was kind of fun being a de facto celebrity.)
A brief, abortive effort to find myself a cup of coffee ended when I remembered I still didn’t have any Canadian money, and there were no obvious ATMs. Still, it gave me a chance to step outside. After hanging out a little in the antechamber, where there had been rumors of a Montréal Gazette reporter, I returned to discover the newly rotated facilitators busy synthesizing. Having gone over the written reports from each session, they were now drawing up a list of ten different sorts of action to be addressed in the next breakouts, writing them on huge sheet of butcher paper taped to one wall, sparking occasional chuckles at some of the evocative not-quite-English circumlocutions:
Festive and Arts groups
Protectors of the Convergence Center
Blockaders of Streets and Boulevards
Blockaders of Outside Specific Buildings
Occupations of Buildings
Walking/Advancing on/Visiting/Moving towards the Wall
Redecoration of the Urban Scenery
Food and the Reappropriation of Different Things
Flying Squads/Support Groups
Halfway through, a woman from the Pagan Bloc asks “can I propose one more? I think you’ve heard our proposal for a Living River…”
“Would that not be considered a kind of flying squad?”
“No, it’s not a flying squad. It’s a whole bloc unto itself.”
“All right then.” He writes:
10) Riviere Humaine
The facilitators are trying to get some sense of the consensus on the Convergence Center and color attitude questions; tell us if anyone absolutely missed lunch there’s still some food on the table; and then introduce representatives of various working groups: Legal and Medical, Housing and Finance.
The Legal collective (they seem to consist mainly of English-speaking students from McGill) handed out information sheets and explained that each affinity group should name one member to serve as legal contact. That person should strive to avoid arrest, and keep track of where everyone is at all times. They said the legal contact should probably attend at least one legal training, especially if they come from the US, as laws are different here. This is also the person who knows what needs to be taken care of if any member of their affinity group is arrested: who’ll need someone to feed their cat, lie to their boss, etc. They will be adopting the system used at mass action in the US: members of each affinity group will be asked to fill out a form registering their real names—or at least, some letters of their real names—along with their action names, and these papers will be guarded assiduously by the legal team. That way they’ll be able to keep track of who’s in jail as the names come in, and make the information available on a special legal phone number. “And don’t everyone call at once about people missing if there’s a mass arrest! Only your legal contact person should call the number.”
Someone asks: “Does this mean we’re not doing jail solidarity? Should we bring IDs or is everyone going to be refusing to give their names once arrested? A lot of this hasn’t been completely worked out yet.”
The medics explain that no one should assume that, if injured, they will be able to rely on official paramedics and ambulances. Usually ambulances will refuse to go anywhere near an action. Therefore, the medical team will be providing three levels of medical infrastructure during the action: a clinic with trained professionals, probably somewhere near the IMC; several street teams of experienced action medics with proficiency in first aid, hypothermia treatment, and dealing with tear gas and pepper spray, and, finally, each affinity group should name one person as their own medical monitor and make sure that person attends at least one medical training.
As questions begin I step out into the antechamber, do a quick interview with a reporter in exchange for a cup of coffee, take a stroll outside. We’ve been meeting for five or six hours. When I stroll back in, Jaggi, representing the financial team, is explaining the organizers are currently about $20,000.00 in the red. Then, they ask for volunteers to facilitate the next round of breakout groups. I end up in the “approaching the wall” group (assuring myself this is because that’s what my affinity group is intending to do and has nothing to do with the fact the facilitator, a young blonde woman looks strikingly like a punk rock version of Buffy the Vampire Slayer). Dean joins me—along with Emma, who has spent most of the session making friends with some Black Bloc types on the other side of the circle. Lesley says she’s going to cruise out with Lynn to find the place where she’s supposed to stay.
The final meeting of the day was a little frustrating. In theory, it was the most militant session—though we still couldn’t discuss militant tactics explicitly. It was also a strange mix: there were twenty-six of us (fifteen men, eleven women, as I duly set down in my notebook), mainly anarchists but also including representatives of the ISO, IAC, and other Marxist types with whom anarchists don’t usually feel comfortable discussing militant actions. Everyone seemed a little uncertain how much they could say. Spokescouncils are by definition not truly secure environments, most of us didn’t know each other. Anyone might be a cop.
We start by examining our maps. A local woman in her forties with green streaks in her hair and a prominent nose ring explained some of the background for out of towners:
Punk Woman: I’m not sure how large the perimeter is going to be. When they first announced it, it was going to be 2.8 kilometers but now it seems to have become smaller. We’ve been asked to stay away from the zones marked 2 and 6, which is a working-class neighborhood called St. John Baptiste where the local community group has come out in strong support of us, but is also hoping to avoid any provocations that might cause the police to tear gas their neighborhood.
Zones 4, C, and B will be the most difficult areas as there’s in effect a natural stone wall, with cliffs all around. We can pretty much forget about approaching the wall from there..
If there is anyone here who knows this part of the city better than I do, they should probably step forward to help us. But I think we all agree that coming in through a working-class neighborhood that will be hurt by the FTAA should be scratched off. So, that pretty much leaves Zone 3, an approach from the west. The problem is that zone is also going to have the most police as it’s the main entrance.
Grey Beard: Yes, it’s going to have to be Zone 3. If we’re going to attack the fence, I’d assume that would be in a fairly large group. Not only are all the other areas less easily accessible, there’s no place to retreat (even if we could get up on the cliffs, we couldn’t run down them again if the police started pushing us back). Areas C and B are below the river—no place to retreat either—so maybe only Zone 3 is physically possible?
Facilitator: [also staring at her map] …which is the one where these big streets are?
Grey Beard: Yes, I think so.
Someone: That’s the northwest section of the wall?
Someone else: Will there be many entrances to the perimeter, or just one or two?
Facilitator: They said there would be nine but they haven’t announced where they’ll be yet.
Craig [anarchist type with giant earplugs]: Do we know what kind of fence it’s going to be?
Someone: Not for sure. We know it’s going to be a chain-link fence with concrete base, and then barbed wire on top. A small stretch of it has already been put up on the Plains of Abraham, near the cliffs, but I’m not sure if anyone has seen it yet.
Suzette: Zone 3 was the site of a big demo and battle last year around this same time of year, around school reform. It ended with a pretty big victory for us in an open field. I heard Zone E is Touristville, if anything should go wrong it should be there, perhaps between residential areas
Punk Woman: Hitting two places at same time might be a good strategic move, also, if we’re talking about Zone 3… might it be easier to advance on (what kind of language are we actually allowed to use here? Visit? Attack?) a place where the wall opens and closes. Another possibility might be not to actually attack the fence at all but to shut down the main entrance; maybe by locking down to it. That would effectively shut the cops in and away from the rest of us. A third option (perhaps something to do at a different location) might be to get grappling hooks and actually haul the fence down with lots of people. Would that be possible? I don’t actually know if the concrete part will be cemented to the ground but probably it won’t be.
Lesley: Not until now!!
[Much laughter and glancing up at invisible microphones in the ceiling]
Young French Girl: Do we know if the security forces will completely surround the fence? Or might there be gaps in their lines?
Grey Beard: Well, we know there’ll be five thousand riot police to protect maybe two, maybe three kilometers of fence. I’m not sure how that translates.
Presumably they won’t be evenly dispersed, They’ll have large units at the gates, small squads here and there
Facilitator: Does anyone have a proposal for anything to put on the formal agenda? Because, you know, we don’t actually have an agenda yet.
There seems little point and we decide to keep it informal. So: What would be the best day to try to breach the wall? CLAC has only been talking about Friday, the 20th, but the big labor march was on Saturday and that would be at least forty, fifty thousand people. As always, the union leaders were doing everything possible to keep their people away from the action. The march would begin at a location fairly far away from the Summit and then proceed in the opposite direction. Still, if it would be possible to divert even a fraction of the marchers towards the wall itself, it would completely change the balance of forces. Many people remark on the unlikelihood of such a thing. Since Seattle, union bureaucrats have become remarkably good at ensuring this never happened. Others remark that Canada is different. Finally, we all end up yielding to the authority of an old man in a fisherman’s cap and scraggly beard who had been largely silent until now. He explains, in French, that he grew up in the old city, and might have some insights others don’t. After a little bit, seeing that the out-of-towners are paying rapt attention, he switches to English:
Fisherman: It’s true, we do not know where the police will be, but we can assume they’re not just going to be inside the perimeter—to get near it might be a battle in itself. If so, if we are going to be under fire from tear gas and the like as we approach, I think we should not approach from our own neighborhoods. There are two broad thoroughfares: one is René Lévesque, the other Grand Allée, which runs parallel to its south. These are the streets of the bourgeoisie. They are both streets where top bureaucrats and wealthy people live; so this would be a good area from which to advance on the perimeter.
David: What my affinity group has been wondering is: if by some miracle we do get inside the perimeter on the 20th, well—then what? We’ve heard talk about disrupting the opening ceremonies, if only by our being there, or somehow cutting off the media control center.
Dean: Once inside, will we be able to mix into the crowds? Will there be guards checking for people with passes?
Fisherman: It’s not clear. A lot depends on how much of a threat they think we are [glancing up again at the imaginary microphone]. If, after this spokescouncil, they feel the perimeter is insecure, they will make the area smaller, and more easily defensible. As a result, there will be fewer ordinary citizens inside. That will mean they’ll be better able to see who’s who (that is, there will be more suits, less people dressed like us); but, then, we’ll be able to see who’s who as well. If they end up having to make it a capitalist ghetto, even if that means they can do what they want inside, that in itself is a big victory for us—and an attack on that space, even a purely symbolic one, would be a great victory as well.
Gradually I realized what was going on. As I mentioned, in any such meeting, one had to assume someone in the room was a cop (the references to microphones were mostly a way of being polite). Therefore, the only person who was completely comfortable talking was the one man who actually thought it was tactically advantageous for the police to know our plans. Everyone else was beginning to look increasingly fidgety and uncomfortable. Finally, someone suggested we’d gone about as far as we could, and we broke for dinner; with Emma and some others passing word that those who were really serious about the project, and had someone who could vouch for them, would meet later at the CASA party that night to reconvene. Meanwhile, we will write in our official report that it’s too soon to come to any real conclusions, but we need to convene a spokescouncil to plan this specific action a few days before the summit, when we have some idea what things will actually look like.
The party was held at a place called the Scanner Bistro, a “multimedia club” with an Internet café and bar downstairs, along with a small bandstand. Upstairs there was another bar, a pool table, foosball, a Judge Dredd pinball machine, and scattered monitors and speakers on the wall that enabled one to see and hear whatever live act was on stage downstairs. As our crew came in—about twelve of us from the wall breakout group, including most of the New Yorkers—two women were on stage, performing some sort of spoken-word piece in highly colloquial French. Later, there was a man who I think was a comedian; we were told a band was going to be coming out later, but by that time none of us were paying much attention. We ended up upstairs, looking for a table, because, finally, someone had found a proper map.
Or almost all of us. Dean went straight for the pool table, where he was soon engaged in a long conversation with a lanky, sandy-haired fellow with whom he was, ultimately, to have a tumultuous six-month romance.
We found a spot in the corner, in an area where the free dinner had been earlier. We pushed together a couple tables and made short work of the remaining food, which consisted of a huge tub of rice, a dish with beans and veggies in tomato sauce, and some loaves of French bread and oleo. The vegans wouldn’t touch the oleo, but everyone was munching bread for the first half of the parley. Large maps of the city were spread across the surface of the table and taped into place. Everyone huddled, and the parley continued for hours, with pitchers of beer periodically appearing out of nowhere, always to another collective toast of “smash the state!”
It was the perfect meeting, except, perhaps, for the fact that we were right below the speakers, and combined with the ambient noise of dozens of festive conversations, it made it a little difficult to hear. So the real meeting was always the seven or eight people in the center at any given time, who could actually hear each other, usually with several others hanging at the edges waiting to get in. It never took all that long. Someone would always be taking off to fetch beer or smoke a joint or use the bathroom, and then have to wait at the fringes when they came back. Still, we kept it up for something like three hours, a little bubble of activist intensity, almost completely oblivious to the increasingly rambunctious dance party that eventually encompassed us and, later in the evening, began to die away.
It was here we finally planned the attack on the wall. It didn’t take long to go through the possibilities. Even if it did prove possible to enter the security zone, there was no obvious thing to do once we were inside. A banner hang would be possible, but it would probably require the collaboration of homeowners inside the perimeter—there doubtless would be some, but they could hang the banners themselves. We could occupy a building, but it would lead to absolutely certain arrest, and it was not clear what would be the point. There was only one thing for it. We had to destroy the wall. Doing so would be utterly legitimate. We would be providing a public service. The heads of every state in the Americas were coming to this city to set up fences right through people’s neighborhoods; we anarchists were coming to take them down. The question was how, and most of the next three or four hours was spent going over possibilities: grappling hooks, wire clippers, tactics, tools, diversions, angles of approach. Normal wire clippers are not, in fact, strong enough to cut through the chain-links of a security fence; they are, however, strong enough to sever the wires that connect the chain-links to the upright posts. Once severed, it was a matter of weight: at least one person had to climb to the top of the fence and lean backwards as others pulled. Alternately, fences could be taken down by a small team armed with grappling hooks and cables. Probably the best approach would be not to start all in the same place. We should have several columns. Ideally, three, each with their own peculiar tactics. Ya Basta! could come down one big avenue, the Black Bloc down the next, the CLAC/CASA people (none of whom were actually present) down a third. Each would thus approach a different section of the fence, but all be in sight of one another. Each would also have its own particular style: the CLAC people more militant, Ya Basta! more silly, Black Bloc more mobile. Members of Toronto and Montréal Ya Basta!—two groups of which I had hitherto heard only the vaguest rumors—promised to lead any other Yabbas into action, since they knew the territory.
In fact, we discovered that there would be four different Ya Basta! contingents: the two from Canada, one from New York, and one from Connecticut. The latter was represented by a young woman who everyone just knew as “Kitty from Connecticut,” a music student at Connecticut College, who I knew as an activist with the CGAN (the Connecticut Global Action Network). Kitty had just gotten into town and had missed most of the spokes, but gravitated directly to the Scanners meeting. I was really gratified to see her; she was a talented facilitator and all-around impressive activist (CGAN had already scored two major victories, over the last year: the first when they blockaded downtown Hartford with an alliance between anarchists and janitors, the second when they almost single-handedly managed to force Hartford airport to settle a strike with their restaurant workers, by proposing an action to support the picket line, which apparently left management convinced they were about to face a hoard of rampaging Black Bloc’ers.) At the moment, though, she was mainly interested in finding someone who could roll her a joint. She disappeared, someone from the Prince Edwards Islands slid into her chair, and Sasha, fresh from the IMC, took the position that person had had sitting on a nearby table.
The conference continued. If American Ya Basta! didn’t manage to get through the border, we’d have to reduce it to two columns. We kept having to remind each other though that we probably wouldn’t be able to just walk up to the fence; we’d more likely have to have to fight our way up the last three blocks to even get in a position to start using wire cutters. And once we were there we’d need at least four to six minutes to bring down a fence. So, the plan would only work if larger numbers of other protesters join us. Probably what would end up happening was that half the Yellow Bloc would be inspired to join in, the other half run away. Whether there would be enough of them to let us fight our way to the wall depended on the total numbers and no one had any clear idea what those numbers were likely to be. Columns might be anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand. Really it all depended on the local students. They certainly seemed militant enough. But would they come through?
By about 1AM, after what must have been the sixteenth round of “smash the state!,” we ended up composing a call to action—called, since it had a certain ring, “the Scanner Accords.” It began: “We are all calling for everyone who feels hemmed in by walls to come to Québec City.” Only a paragraph, really, but somehow it was only by releasing it that the meeting seem complete. We wrote out five or six sentences, on a sheet of paper, edited it collectively, posted the text anonymously on an IMC web page somewhere in the United States, with a note saying it was to be forwarded everywhere. Then, we went outside and set the sheet on fire. Sasha offered to film the ritual, but someone objected, just in case high-tech means could be used to gather fingerprints from the close-ups of our hands. (This seemed to almost everyone else kind of ridiculous, but one learns that, on matters of “security culture,” it is usually best not to argue.) We went home agreeing to meet at 1PM the next afternoon, as the spokescouncil was winding down, to investigate the areas where the first advance on the wall was likely to take place.
Our group slept through the official CLAC/CASA tour of the city, which was supposed to be in the morning, but we managed to make it over to the spokes by around 11:00AM—for a change, just as it was getting under way. (Actually it was supposed to have started at 10AM but we seemed to be dealing with a serious case of “activist time.”) Numbers were smaller than the day before, but not much. Lesley, Dean, Lynn, and I reconstructed our little nest—now with Sasha and Kitty joining us—Emma was off with her new Black Bloc friends. The CLAC team had rotated too: Jaggi was no longer translator, but was actually facilitating this time, along with an older woman I hadn’t seen before.
The meeting began with report-backs from the breakout sessions the night before; afterwards, we would consider a series of concrete proposals. The report-backs are worth documenting, I think, because they give some sense of how, through such open-ended and sometimes apparently unproductive discussions, action plans really can take form. In each case, the idea was to create a summary of ideas that spokes could take back to their affinity groups across North America to see which they would like to develop and plug into, and to provide the means to stay in touch with one another (usually by email).
1) The “festive artsy sort of group”
We decided to make sure there were events happening all over the city. One idea: to have festive performances that would support blockades without actually being a part of them. Another was to turn the wall into a sort of art show (um, before it was attacked that is). We can animate, decorate it. We spoke about the need to make very large objects like puppets well beforehand, and to ensure we have a space in which to do this. As for supplies: fabric, scraps, a lot of things can be made out of found objects. We’re asking everyone to start putting aside anything they find that can be used for costumes, props, or construction projects.
We’d also like to make a couple small points: we heard a lot of ideas about drumming, street theater, puppets; we’re expecting a lot of that. Some suggested the idea of perhaps also sectioning off some area for an ongoing silent or unmoving vigil, to represent the voices that are silenced by this kind of summit.
2) Protectors of the Convergence Center
We decided Convergence Center defense is indeed a priority, and that we’ll employ three methods:
a. continual surveillance inside and outside
b. organizing evacuations of people and materials if attacked
c. organizing active resistance to any police provocation or attack.
3–4) Blockading groups
In the end, it didn’t seem to make any sense to have two different blockade working groups, so we merged.
Most of us are in favor of blockading highways, but we’re not at the point of being able to make concrete proposals as to which. There is also the question of how to bring up the kind of equipment (for example, lockboxes) that would be necessary to maintain a really effective blockade. The border is a big problem for people from the US who would otherwise have access to such things; also CLAC/CASA is too busy to organize this. We suggest affinity groups should make arrangements in advance with friends elsewhere in Canada, for instance the Maritimes, to get things delivered—if they were sent here, they would probably be intercepted. We decided that the city should be divided into zones, to ensure that everything is covered.
There’s also a specific proposal from the GOMM for a plan they have to organize a festive-style blockade with three hundred people or more near the center of the city.
There was some discussion of the possibility of a blockade of the airport, possibly motorcades of some of the heads of state, but no specific proposals were discussed.
Another idea was blockading off particular symbols of capitalism; like trains, or shopping centers. Someone proposed an organizational meeting regarding that at 3:30 this afternoon, after this meeting. It was 3:30, right?
[Woman in Spider-Man T-shirt: 3:30, that’s right.]
Finally, there was the idea of blockading some major media outlet and demanding that they play a prepared tape, setting out some of our principle objections to the treaty.
5) Occupations of buildings
There are three colleges here in Québec City and one of them is already occupied by OQP. For the other two, we’re discussing whether and how to occupy them.
6) Walking/advancing on/visiting/moving towards the wall
Many affinity groups expressed a desire to pay a visit to the security perimeter. There was clearly a strong willingness to undertake this, and a feeling there were multiple goals to be served by this: to disrupt the perimeter, disrupt the Summit, possibly even penetrate it. But that’s about as far as we can go in this context. A lot of information still needs to be clarified, and most of the logistics still need to be worked out. We would have to decide on official visit points and the means to be employed to make any adjustments to the wall that might be required. Shall it be through a mass mobilization, or separate affinity group actions? Since there’s so much to be considered, and so much depends on numbers, information as yet unavailable, we suggest that a spokescouncil be convened a few days after the fence is actually put up to make final decisions.
7) Redecoration of the urban furniture
Or, I guess that should properly be, “urban scenery.” (There were certain translation problems. Mainly they seem to be referring to the judicious use of spray paint and other artistic materials.) We didn’t have a formal meeting, really, but just said hello to each other and then all went off to join other groups. We recommend that these issues be left to each individual affinity group. There’s nothing that really needs to be coordinated on a city-wide scale.
8) The reappropriation of food and other items
There are all kinds of means that can be used by the Red, Yellow, and Green Blocs to reclaim things. Our idea is to do some advance scouting of potential sites for food commandos (commando du boeuf). A Food Manifesto will be written to explain why this type of action is taking place.
As a sidenote: Montréal Food Not Bombs is currently preparing a large amount of food that will be frozen and brought in for a collective feast, perhaps to be held underneath the highway on Friday or Saturday night.
9) Flying squads (groupes mobiles)
The purpose of flying squads is to provide support for hot points during the action; also, to take advantage of opportunities that might open up suddenly. All this, of course, depends on having accurate information on what’s happening. A comms system is essential, and we’re not sure what sort of communications infrastructure (radios? walkie-talkies?) has already been set up. We are imagining numerous relatively small groups of three, four, or five people, well-coordinated with each other. They will decide for themselves which of the three blocs they will be supporting, what calls to respond to. The coordination already being organized.
10) The living river
We decided… well, this action is organized with Vermont pagans. [There are five of the Pagan Cluster in attendance: four women, one man. Starhawk isn’t with them. All of them are sitting, somewhat incongruously, on chairs. They’re mostly older, I note, so it might just be bad backs.] We will be taking the St. Lawrence as an ally, and using it, along with generally using water as a theme to represent what we’re fighting against and what we’re fighting for, as a form that will let us move easily back and forth from one action, or one kind of action, to another.
We are asking people who would like to participate to bring blue material, ribbons, clothing. The idea is to create a sort of Blue Bloc…
[This is translated. “Oh no! Yet another Bloc,” sighs one of the facilitators. Everybody laughs.]
…that way we won’t be stuck to one zone or style of action. People can join, rivulets can split off, streams will flow back together again. If people want to stay at blockade, they can do so; others can perform ceremonies or offer support for other groups.
Male Pagan: If folks want to join, they are encouraged to join affinity groups beforehand. Not necessarily to join as individuals.
Oh, yes: our other theme is free access to water for all people, inspired by the Cochabamba declaration. In consequence, we’ll be providing bottled water for everyone, and are encouraging people to bring samples of water from your particular homes to contribute to one great ritual that will take place at the same time as the opening ceremonies of the Summit.
Facilitator: We have a very brief period for questions—just five minutes, because otherwise this can go on forever.
Flying Squad Spokesman: Oh, the flying squad group forgot to add: we’ll have a listserv, to talk about communications equipment too, as that’s very important for this. You can sign up through the CLAC website.
Bearded Man: Also, one idea that came out of our first breakout concerning the Convergence Center was to do like LA and seek a legal injunction stopping the cops and firemen from coming in. We want to make sure Legal is aware of that.
[Few questions follow, but lots of announcements of listservs being set up, contact information, and so on.]
Facilitator: Let’s pass to new proposals, then. I’d like to remind people we have to be out of here by five.
The first proposal was, once again, the Convergence Center defense. It was not clear to any of us why this proposal had to be restated—it was, in fact, the exact same one CLAC had made earlier. Presumably, it was some kind of formality. In theory, each proposal was supposed to be followed by five people speaking in favor, five against, but since no one proved interested in speaking against the proposal, it was considered consensed on and we moved to the next.
The next was much more interesting, because it brought in an element of sharp conflict. It also gives an example of how consensus decision making actually operates (because, despite the formal rules, we were effectively using a system of “modified consensus”), most of all because the conflict never explicitly came to the surface. Objectionable proposals are rarely shot down. Even when any one person in theory has the right to veto (“block”) a proposal, it almost never happens: instead, there is a process that could almost be described as killing with kindness.
The proposal was brought forward by a young woman in a big white cableknit sweater and pink woolen cap:
Pink Cap: Among the blockade group, we decided it would be really useful to form a tactical committee.
Such a committee would consist of people here willing to come up early, and also, of course, CLAC/CASA folks as well. That way, it would be able to scope out the city as the wall goes up, figure out what hotels, or other important spots need to be hit to disrupt the Summit as much as possible. So, when the various people come to the Convergence Center on Wednesday and Thursday we’ll have a plan so we can direct people to the best places where they can make an impact, disrupt, even stop it. That’s what the 3:30 meeting will hopefully be so please come if you have any insights, or just are willing to help in any way.
Older Facilitator: What is the proposal, then? To create such a group? Are you just asking people to come to your meeting or making a formal proposal?
Pink Cap: We feel we need the help of locals to pull this off. So we want to know: is this an idea embraced by the group? Because, if not, we can’t do it. The idea is to take account of past experiences, thinking what’s worked out and what hasn’t at Seattle, in DC, and so on.
Older Facilitator: So, on the proposal, are there any clarifying points or questions?
Woman in Rainbow Dreads: Is this a call from one group, or a decentralized call, open to all? Because in CLAC/CASA we have been trying to develop a process that will ensure that not one single group ends up dominating coordination. We feel that’s very important.
Pink Cap: We are envisioning different people, people from many affinity groups, people from different parts of the US and Canada, who come together with an idea. It would be like a spin-off of spokescouncil. To ensure that when thousands of people come, we can really close down the city, really make an impact on the Summit.
Older Facilitator: I see one more clarifying question.
American Woman: This is not a question, but: if all this is centralized only around street blockades…
Jaggi: Um, we’re only asking for clarifying questions at this point.
Another American Woman: Actually, I believe the facilitator called for “clarifying points or questions.” So I have one of those, too. This proposal is being made by people who come from the blockade group, and while we all consider that important, we also hope any such committee would take into account the tactics of other affinity groups so as to help us coordinate the action as a whole collectively, without its being centralized. It would be useful if it were a conduit for information, so people know where to get tactical information to make actions as effective as possible.
Older Facilitator: Please don’t make interventions—we’re asking for clarifying points or questions. A question from a man?
Man: All right then, I’d like to clarify whether the committee will just gather information, or make suggestions. Or will it have any other functions? That is, would it have functions other than as an information bank?
Pink Cap: It would be both. So when people come from out of town, they will have some idea where the important places are—as they might not be familiar with the city…
Older Facilitator: A question from a woman?
Kitty [who had her hand up before]: No, I pass.
Older Facilitator: The woman in the grey hat then.
Lesley: I thought there already is an action committee, created locally. I would like to know what their role will be in relation to this new tactical one.
Pink Cap: There’s an action committee? Where is it, then?
Nicole: There is an action committee within CLAC/CASA, created to deal with logistics and propose actions. We haven’t discussed it yet but if we did we would probably feel we’d be happy to share experiences as it would help us to do our work.
Woman in Spider-Man T-shirt: Yes, I also think it’s a great idea.
Pink Cap: I really feel this is something where we can work together to really make an impact on the Summit.
The interesting thing about this conversation is the delicacy with which it was conducted. At the time, I had only an intuition of what was going on. Certainly, I found it a bit odd that the woman making the proposal kept using the same phrases (“really making an impact on the Summit”) over and over; and, later, that her chief supporter, the woman in a Spider-Man T-shirt, was using remarkably similar terms. Normally, the word “committee” would have been a tip-off as well. An anarchist would have said “working group,” but we were in a foreign environment so it seemed unwise to read too much into word choice. As time went on, it became increasingly clear toes were being stepped on, but such was the non-confrontational ethos that no one was willing to express the fact directly. Rather, almost all the responses were highly constructive, at least in tone.
Woman: In the flying squads group, a lot of us observed that in the past, there has been a problem with unreliable information: Flying squads end up going to someplace based on rumors that turn out not to be true. Would this committee give assistance to communications for us?
Spider-Man: Yes, absolutely
Pink Cap: Yes.
Medic in Blue Bandana: And will this committee be responsible to the spokescouncil? If so, how would that work in real terms?
Spider-Man: The answer to first question is yes—it would provide information for whoever’s at the spokescouncil. To the second: it depends on who’s participating, but judging from previous actions, maybe it will end up dividing the city into sections. So if an affinity group comes and people say, “We want to go do Yellow Bloc, we want to find a blockade, but we won’t resist arrest,” we can say, “Well, we know they need another fifty people here in this sector.” The group can also help facilitate gathering equipment.
Older Facilitator: We’ll let conversation continue for fifteen minutes, which is the maximum we decided to allow for specific proposals, because at the rate we’re going now, it won’t be possible to make decisions. Let’s move from clarifying questions to concerns.
Eric: I’d actually still like to clarify something. This sounds a lot like what we were talking about in the flying squad group, because people didn’t seem to know what was already in place for communications or tactical. We need to figure out somehow how CASA/CLAC tactical and communications and flying squads are all supposed to work together.
Rainbow Dreads Woman: I find the idea of a strategic group interesting, but I want to ensure that there’s not a reduplication of work here. CLAC/CASA has recently formed a communications group, so I want to ensure this committee will be just coordinating blockades.
Spider-Man: We invite you to join the group.
Pink Cap: We want to work with you.
Kitty: I am a little concerned this new group is undertaking to do too much, and might get overwhelmed. Perhaps it would be better to decentralize, divide up the responsibilities a little.
Jaggi: Perhaps it’s time we move to straw poll, to get a sense of the room. If we have consensus, we can move on to something else; otherwise we can have a full debate. Remember: this is just for spokes, people empowered by their collectives or affinity groups, who have the little red or blue pieces of paper.
Man: One last question before we vote: this is a committee just to coordinate blockades?
Blue Bandana: Wait, isn’t it a general tactical committee to coordinate the action?
Many: No! No!
Not only were the proponents of the committee leading a coordinated effort, they seemed to be intent on pushing it as far as it could go. That is, the proposal had started as a committee to convey information about blockades, and seemed to be morphing into something with much broader powers.
Lesley, who had been watching attentively, jabbed me when I reached for my paper. “Don’t vote ‘yes’! Every one of the people pushing for this proposal, they’re all ISO. It’s an ISO coup!”
Which would explain it. When it cames to a vote, we were the only ones who voted no, but there are about fifteen abstentions. This was unusual in itself.
It was not entirely clear to me what would happen next, since CLAC was not, technically, using a consensus process. If this were DAN, we would have blocked, and that would have been the end of it. Or, alternatively, if the facilitator was sufficiently skillful, it would have been clear earlier that some people felt strongly enough about the issue that they would block, and therefore, if the proposal was not simply withdrawn, it would be altered: various people would suggest “friendly amendments” until all the concerns had been addressed. CLAC however was using a system of modified voting: in theory, we were to proceed to debate, with one male speaker for, one male speaker against, etc, and finally, a vote requiring a 75% majority. But, in fact, what happened is precisely what would have happened if this were pure consensus.
Jaggi: So now, since we don’t have complete consensus, we pass to debate. First let’s see if those who voted against wish to clarify the reasons for their opposition; then we’ll take three speakers for the proposal, and three against.
Lesley: I’ve been on tactical committees before…
Someone: Could you stand up please? It would be easier to hear.
Lesley: Yes, sorry. I’m Lesley from NYC DAN. I’ve been on tactical committees before and my experience has been that they don’t tend to work out very well. In Seattle, remember, there was no central coordinating committee. Everything was done by consensus between affinity groups, even on the streets. At A16, though, we had some problems, some gaps in the blockade and, therefore, during the convention protests in Philadelphia and LA, the organizers decided to create tactical teams to provide overall coordination—really more in the way of an experiment than anything else. What we found was that, in Philly, the cops were able to pick off members of the team fairly easily and that caused more disruption than if we hadn’t had any centralized coordinating at all. I wasn’t in LA, but from what I heard, the tactical team quickly became a power structure unto itself, the LA DAN folk ended up being treated like gods and it completely stifled any kind of independent initiative.
Finally, I have some concerns that creating such a team might end up centralizing power away from the local organizers. So, I oppose it, as I believe it’s important to ensure we maintain a very clear commitment to keeping power in local hands.
Jaggi: And the other no vote?
David [interrupted in the process of scribbling notes]: Who me? Um, similar concerns.
Jaggi: Well let’s open up the floor then.
Old Punk: I’d like to propose that as a friendly amendment, the committee be put together in such a way as to ensure that as many affinity groups as possible are represented.
Jaggi: [to Pink Cap]: If that is a friendly amendment… Is it?
Pink Cap: Yeah, okay.
Man: I would also propose it be clarified that the committee not be a decisional body, but one that will gather information and suggest possibilities for action. I think that should be added as a friendly amendment too.
Another man: When we were first talking about this proposal, we formulated it just as a strategic committee specifically to coordinate blockades. Since the straw poll, it seems we are talking about something that will coordinate the entirety of the action. So, there would seem to be a bit of confusion here—it is not clear to me which this is. Creating the first would be great. If it’s the latter, there are groups created to do that already. I would be for it if it is former.
[Brief consultation between the facilitators]
Jaggi: The language we have says “strategic committee to coordinate with other groups,” keeping in mind the friendly amendments…
Of which more quickly followed. By the time it was over, we had a strategic committee committed to a principle of decentralization, to coordinating with CLAC/CASA, and that would have no more than one representative from any specific affinity groups and as diverse a range of such groups represented as possible. When it did finally come to a vote, interestingly, there were a few no votes, but also a good deal of applause—a kind of mutual appreciation for having resolved the issue—and the threat of any sort of central committee emerging had been decisively defanged.
After the vote, Lesley and I went up towards the front, to confer with the CLAC people. Helene—that was the name of the woman with rainbow dreads—thanked us warmly for our opposition. “There is, of course, a strategic committee,” she said, in somewhat uncertain English. “But we didn’t want to seem like we were excluding them. Still, I did see the ISO people there…”
What happened was also, I might note, an excellent example of another key principle of consensus decision making: that one must never question the honesty or good intentions of another activist. In fact, to have even mentioned the ISO in the discussion would have been seen as almost shockingly confrontational.
We take some air; though I end up coming back pretty quickly because it’s still freezing outside and I’d left all of my sweaters in the meeting. I find some coffee and come back just in time to catch the only major incident in which the careful surface of mutual respect and generosity actually begins to break down—predictably enough, around the issue of nonviolence. The issue had, apparently, been the almost exclusive topic of the first spokescouncil a month before. Now, someone is trying to return to it. I am not sure who the man was, but he was a big, bearded, Anglophone fellow in a lumberjack shirt, with a sheet of paper in his hands and a small squad of supporters behind him, His aggressive gestures seemed to mark him immediately as one of those classic activist stereotypes: the belligerent pacifist.
Lumberjack: I would like to talk about diversity of tactics.
[audible groans from around the room]
Older Facilitator: I don’t believe this is an appropriate time or place to discuss this issue.
Lumberjack: Well, if I can’t do it now, where else can I do this? I have a statement I would like to read. Some of us have prepared a statement…
Older Facilitator: Excuse me, I’m trying to explain that…
Lumberjack: …a statement to be adopted by the Red Bloc. We felt it would be appropriate because you did, after all, call for discussion on each bloc’s attitude to the police. So, if you’ll let me begin: [begins reading]
“The goal of the Red Bloc is to express the people’s democratic opposition to the FTAA and Summit of the Americas. To that end our actions will be to disrupt or prevent the Summit meeting. Our direct action will remove any barriers that will block our ability to express our opposition directly to the participants. We will likewise not honor any police actions or requests which will similarly attempt to block our access to these meetings. Our issues are opposition to FTAA and Summit; therefore, we won’t take actions versus the working class people of this city. And while we will not allow the police or their barricades to block our access to the Summit, we will not use offensive weapons or attack the police; if attacked, however, we will respond in a defensive fashion.”
[the speech is continually interrupted by catcalls and heckling]
Jaggi: If you will allow me to translate the heckles here… There has been endless discussion of this already, and this is out of order. What you are saying runs against the principles of diversity of tactics, which we have already discussed (at great length) and finally consensed upon.
Lumberjack: Well, for those of us who are not in Québec City, but in… distant places, it’s hard to translate what a vague phrase like “diversity of tactics” is actually supposed to mean. We feel that if we’re asked to extend our responsibility for solidarity to everyone in the group, we have the right to ask the group to take responsibility for clarifying what limits, if any, they are imposing. We support the idea of diversity of tactics, but that doesn’t mean support for any tactic whatsoever.
Older Facilitator: As one of the co-facilitators[8] I don’t think we can enter a debate on diversity of tactics. The call to attend this spokescouncil was made on the principle of diversity of tactics. And, also, remember that our organization is decentralized, so there is no overarching authority that can place barriers or limits on what particular affinity groups can do. We are a consultatory body, we can’t impose. So, I’d like to pass to a real proposal, if anyone has one.
That is unless there’s a profound feeling in the room that we should discuss this. Is there?
No? Should we have a straw poll?
[There are about 120 people left in the room]
Jaggi: Allow me to explain to anyone unfamiliar with our process that if someone asks for a “straw poll,” that is not a binding vote but a way to get a sense of the room, of people’s feelings on a question, for the guidance of the facilitators. In this case, it would be to find out whether people want to discuss the proposal. Who’s for debating this?
[In favor: one pagan, a small cluster of Lumberjack’s supporters]
[Against: overwhelmingly large number]
[Abstain: about twelve]
Jaggi: All right, we have 75% in favor of moving on so that’s what we’ll do.
The next proposal concerned the starting point of the march: whether to assemble on the Plains of Abraham. There were concerns that it would be unwise to have thousands of activists chilling their heals in a large park in clear sight of the police for several hours before a major action. Others felt it was unwise to change plans so late in the day, because it was important for the Green Bloc at least to be able to know a definitive location in advance. Opinion seemed to be leading towards the former.
Kitty took off, explaining she had promised a friend in the US she would check out the road to the airport. Her friend had heard there’s only a single-lane highway, with no alternate routes. Dean, Sasha, and I head out for our own informal tour with the Scanner folk (Emma’s disappeared somewhere). We assemble, as promised, at 1PM and munch sandwiches as we stroll through the cobbled streets of the soon-to-be forbidden zone.
The Plains of Abraham, a huge stretch of parkland at the top of Jaggi’s cliffs, is still entirely covered with snow. It’s mostly deserted on a frigid Sunday afternoon. About a dozen of us set out in search of the stretch of wall supposedly already installed. We look incredibly obvious in our black hoodies, military pants and endless patches (the kid next to me, in blonde dreads, is wearing a jacket emblazoned with the words “Vegan Death Squad.”) Only Buffy, the previous night’s breakout facilitator, is incognito in brown suede jacket and a camera. She makes a not entirely unconvincing tourist (the camera is in fact to document information of possible tactical use). Sasha has a huge video camera, to document our expedition. Others have cameras too.
As we approach a bemused middle-aged skier for directions, I realize we’ve become the very embodiment of another classic activist stereotype. Actually, it’s the perfect complement to the belligerent pacifist: the crowd of anarchists looking like a bunch of soldiers from some unholy army—what kind of army, you don’t even want to imagine—who, when you actually talk to them, turn out to be the sweetest, most self-effacing people imaginable. Someone asks the skier, sheepishly, about the wall. He first thinks we’re asking about the walls of the old city, but we explain ourselves. “Oh, the new kind of wall,” he smiles, and points us past an ancient tower and down the hill.
The tower is a huge cannon tower overlooking the cliffs; after that things get very steep very quickly. A few of us try to climb down; one of the Prince Edward Islands kids gets a spontaneous nosebleed; only a few of us (me, Dean, two members of Montréal Ya Basta!) actually go down. The fence wasn’t really visible even when we do, but Sasha gets some beautiful panoramic shots for a future documentary.
Later, we took extensive pictures of the area near the Grand Théâtre, where our imagined three-pronged attack was most likely to run into heavy resistance. “See that little park, right next to the theater?” asked Greg, one of the Montréal people. “That’s where we had the huge battle last year over school reform.”
Someone else explains that the government was holding a public hearing on how to carry out educational funding cuts. “They had promised that student groups would be allowed to participate, but then they only invited the right-wing ones.” Those excluded announced their intention to disrupt the conference; the government announced their intention to surround the building with riot police. In the end, it came down to a stand-up battle: riot cops armed with tear gas and plastic bullets on one side and students armed with bricks, pool balls, and molotov cocktails on the other.
“Molotov cocktails?”
“They have totally different standards here. You have to bear in mind there was a kind of guerilla war going on here back in the 1970s. People got killed. Québec itself was under martial law for years. It’s a very different place than the rest of Canada.”
Fifteen minutes later, huddled in a bus shelter to parley on tactics, Greg, a little uncomfortable, brings up the matter again. “Actually, I’ve been meaning to bring this up. We’ve been discussing this a lot in Montréal and I think the consensus is, we’re all thinking, that molotovs are definitely not a good idea.” Milton, from the same affinity group, is nodding vigorously. “I’m not saying this as a moral thing,” he notes to the Americans, “because I’ve never seen molotovs used against people who are actually vulnerable. You only use them against police in full flame retardant riot gear, who you know aren’t going to get seriously hurt no matter what you do. So… it’s not like you’re actually trying to set anyone on fire. It’s more… Okay, the way I see it, it’s a way of showing really serious purpose, showing that you’re determined to get through. A cop who sees a firebomb coming at him can’t help but be startled, even if he knows it won’t kill him; it can’t help but make him wonder if he really wants to hold his position. It’s a way of driving people back. And it works for that.”
“It worked last year during the park battle, definitely,” says one of the PEI kids. Then after a second: “not that I’m endorsing it either.”
“The problem with molotovs…” Milton says. “Well, okay, first of all, if you throw anything, you have to do it from the front of the line. That’s true of anything you throw and it seems obvious, but I can’t believe how often some idiot forgets it. In the last year’s battle, we had a shield wall, and some people would lob bricks and bottles over the line from waaaay back—so, of course, occasionally one would hit the back of a shield-bearer’s head. If I hadn’t been wearing a helmet, I would have got brained totally.”
One of the PEI kids chimes in: “Even worse, if you’re going to use molotovs, you have to practice first. It’s amazing how many people don’t realize that. At the very least, you have to practice packing it. If you don’t, then half the time, when you cock your arm back to throw, the rag will pop out and the gasoline’ll spill all over the guy behind you, so now his clothes are soaked with gasoline and there’s people playing with open flames all around him.”
“So no molotovs.”
“The one really legitimate use for molotovs,” Buffy points out, “might be for property destruction. For example: say there’s a water cannon. Now, that’s a totally legitimate target.”
“Remember, the water cannon didn’t slow people down too much in that last demo.”
“Water cannon can be pretty effective if they’re used right.”
“Still,” says Greg. “The reason I wanted to have this little parley was to get consensus we didn’t want molotovs—that tactically, it’s just not a good idea. So: does anyone actually have an objection to that? Or do we have consensus?”
Nods all around. I assure him that no one on the US side has even considered using them.
We swung back to the spokescouncil just in time to see Emma and her new friend Craig come out in tremendous irritation. Apparently, a GOMM representative had, indeed, come in and asked for certain zones to be named Yellow-only; one was presumably the highway area, which we don’t want anyway, so that’s fine, but another was right up to the fence on one of the three streets we were going to march on. We shrug and figure, they’ll work it out. Anyway, if we want to get home before 2AM, we’d better start driving.
For about an hour, Emma is still fulminating against pacifists. Why is it that people insist on trying to impose their own codes of conduct on others? How can they call themselves anarchists? These things should be left strictly up to each affinity group to decide for themselves.
“Are you saying,” I ask, “that you’re against written codes? Or any kind of code?”
“I’m saying any kind of code. What possible purpose do they serve?”
We go at it for some time. I remark on the possibility of Nazis showing up. Emma points out that Nazis do try to crash anarchist events fairly regularly. That’s why many affinity groups allow only one exception to the general principle of nonviolence: when one has to deal with Nazis.
“All right, then, say you’re at an action and you notice that another affinity group has shown up with a tactical thermonuclear device.”
Emma rolled her eyes. “Which of course you could have easily prevented if only you had earlier published a code of conduct specifying ‘no tactical thermonuclear devices?’ Look, someone does something crazy, then all right, people around them have to do what they have to do.”
Mercifully, Sasha changes the subject. We spend another fifteen minutes trying to get straight the different varieties of Canadian security to be ranged against us: from the RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) to the Sûreté du Québec—names which gives the American activist the impression that we are about to be attacked by a combination of Dudley Do-Right and Inspector Clouseau. (Inevitable repartee: “Does your dog bite?” “Do you have a license for that minkey?”) I remark that in Vermont, at least, with its socialist administration, we can expect the police to treat us with kid gloves. Emma is extremely skeptical about this. More likely they’ll be especially harsh to prove themselves. Anyway, what influence do local politicians have over the police? By Montréal, we’re talking families. Sasha grew up in Hollywood. I’m from a lefty working-class family in New York. Both Emma and Dean, however, turn out to be from Catholic working-class families from the Midwest, and this trumps everything. Emma’s parents, for instance, adhere to some extreme charismatic sect. Dean thinks his mom is slightly schizophrenic (it runs in the family); she completely freaked when he was sixteen and she read his diary and discovered he was gay (“and it’s not like there was anything explicitly sexual in there; I just admitted I had a crush on someone”). She covered the diary in pictures of saints and the Virgin Mary and to this day hasn’t given it back to him, She used to send him underwear secretly blessed with holy oil to control his genitals. Visions and signs: Emma’s mom thinks she’s possessed by the devil and that’s why she became an anarchist. She has monks praying to rescue her daughter. Sasha grew up around Hollywood, his mom Jewish, his dad Polish. Mom banned pop music from him for many years. Emma and Dean are unimpressed. They go on exchanging Catholic stories for what seems like approximately two and a half hours. Somewhere in upstate New York, I manage to go to sleep.
The next couple weeks were increasingly frenetic. I’ll give only the most schematic account.
NEW YORK DIARY CONTINUED
Ya Basta! meeting, a big circle in Moose’s living room. This meeting marks the first appearance of Smokey and Flamma’s friend Jesse, a cocky-seeming young man newly arrived from Louisiana. Tells us he’s an “organizer,” needs something to organize, and Ya Basta! is clearly in need of help. He’s actually a pretty good facilitator and insists we have a proper meeting, but just about everyone not of the Smokey and Flamma faction takes an instant dislike to him.
Hours at the IMC, mainly spent consoling Moose over a recent romantic disaster. Everyone is dashing about making preparations for the border action. Warcry is going as a dollar bill. Julie from the Urban Justice League is popping in and out, looking alternately sweet and officious. Twinkie and Brad1 are out on bicycles when I come, searching for sushi. There’s an enormous store of the stuff in the IMC fridge, mostly with the fish parts carefully picked out.
1 Brad Will—the same Brad Will murdered in Oaxaca in November 2006. There seems little point now in disguising his identity.
Early word coming in about the border action. It sounds like it went fairly well—everyone was detained, and most told not to enter Canada for five years, but that was kind of expected, and at least we got coverage on WBAI and even some Canadian TV. Still, there seems to have been some kind of falling about between activists. The SalAMI action in Ottawa also went extremely well and grabbed headlines all over Canada. Of course, US media never even mentioned it but that was only to be expected.
I was at the DAN meeting at Charas at 6 PM. Lesley and I gave our report-back from the Québec spokes, trying to explain the dynamics of the three color blocks. There were the usual worries about what was actually going on at Akwesasne and about Shawn’s rhetoric, as well as a long discussion of PGA’s upcoming general meeting in Cochabamba, and the need for Continental DAN to finally get on board and formally endorse the PGA principles (which we do).
Various people in phone contact with the crew at the Canadian border explain what the problem there was: it was Julie again. No one seems surprised. This time it’s racial insensitivity. Twinkie had participated in the border action mainly to make a point about immigration issues: where white people can, normally, cross at will, things are entirely different for anyone who looks like they’re from Asia, Latin America, or Africa; and, of course, if white people try to make a political issue of all this, then suddenly, they can’t cross either. Julie, in her inimitable style, managed to not only completely fail to point this out to the WBAI reporter, but ignored Twinkie herself when she tried to get a place at the mike to explain it. Twinkie was very, very angry.
The “Pagan Call to Action” appears, one of perhaps a dozen minor calls for different groups or clusters taking part in the upcoming actions. It does indeed cite the Cochabamba Declaration, framed by Bolivian groups who successfully fought back an attempt by the government to privatize the local water into the hands of Bechtel:
The Cochabamba Declaration:
Water belongs to the earth and all species and is sacred to life, therefore, the world’s water must be conserved, reclaimed, and protected for all future generations and its natural patterns respected.
Water is a fundamental human right and a public trust to be guarded by all levels of government, therefore, it should not be commodified, privatized, or traded for commercial purposes. These rights must be enshrined at all levels of government. In particular, an international treaty must ensure these principles are noncontrovertable.
Water is best protected by local communities and citizens, who must be respected as equal partners with governments in the protection and regulation of water. Peoples of the earth are the only vehicle to promote earth democracy and save water.
Here on the banks of the St. Lawrence/Magtogoek, with the river as our ally and the ancestors marching with us, we will become a living river, to bring this declaration as a challenge to the world’s governments and an inspiration to her peoples.
The name-calling on the listservs is getting unusually vituperative as everyone seems to be pouncing on everyone else over the April 1 Border Action. The organizers themselves aren’t saying much, but the moment anyone raises the issue of racism, someone else seems to slam them as a Marxist sectarian. Twinkie herself hasn’t posted anything, but finally, one of her friends uploads Twinkie’s own version of events:
Can someone remind me why we are protesting the FTAA? Hmm???? To recruit more people in our organizations??? Or the fact that corporations ignore borders and people are oppressed by them! What about Cornwall and what’s happening to the Mohawks? Are we going there because it’s an easy way into Québec, or is it because we really support the fact that the border is a daily affront to their living and sovereignty?
SO! That is what happened on Apr 1st at that media action thingy. No one addressed those issues and only focused on their lame, privileged, white asses not being able to get into Canada this ONE TIME because of this mass mobilization protest…
Meanwhile, she noted, as we were being politely and speedily processed there were poor-looking people of color waiting on line forever, some probably to end up in immigration detention. Did anyone even think to bring know-your-rights flyers or any kind of outreach? Did anyone even mention them at the press conference? Twinkie ends with a ringing declaration “NO MORE STREET THEATRE WITH PRIVILEGED ACTIVISTS AT SITES OF OPPRESSION!!!! Call me a separatist if you will, but I will not work with people with bad politics, and I will publicly call out people on their racism.”
The Montréal Gazette reports that prosecutors in Québec are saying that they’ve been asked to delay all bail hearings for protesters arrested at the upcoming summit for three to five days to keep them off the streets (Marsden 2001). Several, outraged, are announcing they intend to refuse to cooperate.
Ya Basta!, meanwhile, is on the verge of break-up. April 5 was supposed to be the meeting at which we discussed common principles: what the collective is ultimately supposed to stand for. Jesse threatens to block any such discussion on the grounds that Ya Basta! is supposed to be “anti-ideological.” Laura and I barely managed to restrain Moose from marching out. “Anti-ideological means we’re not declaring ourselves anarchists or communists or adherents to any particular… you know, ideology. It doesn’t mean we don’t stand for anything at all. Or why are we going to Québec to begin with? Maybe we should form into two teams, one protesting the FTAA, one supporting it, and fight each other!”
As a compromise, I pull out a copy of the PGA principles of unity I’d been carrying around for just such an occasion. But that too is shot down, over objections to the phrase “nonviolent civil disobedience,” which, as Target and Jesse and several others point out, could be interpreted as a condemnation of groups in the Global South like the Zapatistas, who have no recourse but to resort to armed struggle. When I try to point out that the Zapatistas actually created PGA, Smokey, who’s facilitating, tables the discussion: “We’ve got a whole series of practical issues we still have to work out tonight and clearly this is going to be a long conversation. Let’s see if we have time to get back to it next week.” At this point, I go out and find Moose, who’s been sitting outside in the hall next to the elevator, to tell him that, if he still wants to leave in a huff, he has my full support.
A small meeting, a little over twenty people, mainly concerned with what to do about what’s beginning to be called the “Akwesasne hemorrhage.” We’ve been getting nothing but bad news. It would seem the Band Council has definitively called Shawn’s bluff. There are rumors that the Feds have been sending around tapes of street battles in Prague, claiming we’re coming to do the same thing in their community. Rumors abound. Some of the Warrior Houses appear to be mobilizing against us. Shawn, on the other hand, keeps assuring us it’s just a matter of working through the process, we have to expect opposition, there are always reactionaries. It’s hard not to notice though that his public statements have completely changed in tone: he’s now calling for us to attend a fish-fry, a festive, “child-friendly” event to discuss trade issues with the community, followed by an entirely peaceful crossing in which activists and community members will mix together and overwhelm customs with our sheer numbers. This creates a dilemma: on the one hand, rumors are necessarily going to be flying that the action will be a disaster. On the other hand, since everything depends on numbers, if enough people believe it will be a disaster, that alone will be enough to make it true.
Reports from Québec City are growing increasingly surreal. An anonymous Canadian celebrity is reported to have announced his or her willingness to provide funding for the construction of a giant medieval catapult with which to lay siege to the summit. Meanwhile, 1,700 prison guards, having received orders to clear hundreds of inmates from the Orsainville and Hull detention facilities to make way for protesters, decide to go on strike. Police are called in to take over the prisons, and the guards adopt tactics of nonviolent civil disobedience, blockading the prison entrances. The police attack, and a dozen guards are arrested.
“They came in formation. They crushed us. They hit us with their clubs,” said Michel Gauthier, a guard at Orsainville for twenty-three years.
“The summit protesters who are scared to come here are right to be scared. We’re the proof today that police here are very dangerous.” (King and Van Praet 2001)
The preceeding week had been full of internal reconciliation efforts within Ya Basta!: parties, messages, proposals to perhaps split into allied but autonomous affinity groups. In the end, when the time for another meeting comes, we have too much practical business to take care of to vituperate: the Burlington trainings, Canadian border scenarios, legal, communications, tactical questions. Moose is feeling increasingly guilty about the idea that he might be encouraging people into a situation where some might get seriously hurt. We end the meeting with a big go-around where we all talk about our parameters and limits concerning violence and nonviolence. Remarkably, just about everyone says exactly the same thing. None of us would be willing to attack someone else, or carry out an act we feel likely to cause physical injury to another person; none of us had the slightest moral problem with damage to corporate property; for pretty much all of us, the really difficult question was what we’d do if a companion or someone we cared about were being physically assaulted—that is, would we be willing to attack someone to save them? Most of us feel we wouldn’t really be able to predict how we would react to such a situation until it actually happeed.
Perhaps, I thought, we weren’t really so far apart as I’d imagined.
Another minor crisis demanding my offices as Minister of Information: the Band Council, or Council of Chiefs had issued a statement expressing alarm at the prospect of violence and destruction and begging activists not to sow discord or commit illegal acts in their community. I am asked to draft a response.
To the Mohawk Council, Akwesasne,
We are writing in response to your recent letter concerning our plans for a crossing through Akwesasne via Cornwall Island and into Canada on April 19th.
We would like to say, first of all, that we are deeply grateful to you for the understanding and spirit of tolerance that you show in your letter, and wish to do everything possible to put your minds at peace about the concerns you raise. Rest assured that we are coming to Akwesasne only as guests of residents who have invited us to do so; we have never planned to do anything, let alone anything violent or destructive, on our own accord. The last thing we would want would be to cause disruption to your lives or create difficulties for you.
Our understanding is that we have been invited to a peaceful, festive event which will involve fried fish, children, and an educational session, in which our hosts will explain to us some of the political issues important to the Mohawk Nation and First Nations people more generally. Afterwards, we will proceed peacefully across the bridge, keeping one lane open to ensure residents will not be inconvenienced and emergency vehicles can get through. At no time have we even contemplated ourselves engaging in confrontation with anyone; rather, we consider ourselves guests on someone else’s land, and wish to act as such, with all possible respect to the Mohawk Nation and all its people. As political activists, we hope that this action will make it possible for us both to gain a greater understanding of the problems facing your Nation, your achievements, and your hopes for the future, and to better enable us to act in solidarity with you in the future, just as our hosts have already shown enormous kindness, understanding, and solidarity with us. We come as friends and we hope to establish a friendship that will endure long after we are gone.
The members of the New York City Direct Action Network
The members of the New York City Ya Basta! Collective
The members of the Philadelphia Direct Action Group
Québec police announce (La Presse, April 14, 2001) that “all possibilities would be examined before using tear gas” and that even then, doing so would be preceded by announcements in four languages. As for plastic bullets, the police said that these would be used only as a last resort before the use of lethal force, always against an individual, never against a crowd, and only when that particular individual “presented a serious threat to the police.”
Marina, who is doing legal work for the Burlington mobilization, reports that her cell phone account was suddenly cancelled, along with two different email accounts. One company sends her a note explaining that her account was terminated because it was being used for “illegal activities.”
All sorts of rumors are spinning around of impending disaster at Akwesasne. Several of us spend hours on email trying to squelch them—Target often suggesting the rumors are spread by police, me emphasizing that without turn-out, there’s no way the action can work.
Finished with the last week of classes, I’m finally free to throw myself into the action full time.
I arrived at the Burlington Convergence after it had been going on for a couple days, almost at the tail end really. Most of my time there had a strange, disjointed, choppy quality. In retrospect, I think some of this had to do with the fact that it seemed half the places I went—in cars, cafés, public places—someone seemed to be playing the Ramones (“I Want to be Sedated,” “Now I Wanna Sniff Some Glue,” “We Want the Airwaves”). It was only later someone explained to me that Joey Ramone had just died of liver cancer. Mainly, though, it was because everything seemed to be falling apart. Checking in at the housing desk, I ran into Raoul, one the Yabbas—a huge, teddybearish fellow in a tiny porkpie hat. “David, you have no idea how glad I am to see you here,” he said, giving me an enormous hug.
“Why? What’s going on? How have the Ya Basta! trainings been going?”
“We only had one. It was a disaster. Now it’s not even clear Ya Basta! exists.”
Apparently, tensions between the trainers had been the spark. The training, held on a UVM campus soccer field, had actually drawn a fair-sized crowd, perhaps fifty all told, and that was on the first day of the convergence when not many people had arrived. There was a kind of vast foam party as everyone played around with different sorts of possible body-armor, then the idea was to have everyone practice group formations in their newly created gear. That was where things began to fall apart. Betty, the dancer—and of course the only one of the trainers with an actual skill or teaching experience—was being systematically sidelined by the triumvirate of Moose, Target, and Jesse, who were all battling with each other for attention. It got to the point where even Betty, normally the most cheerfully philosophical person one might imagine, started to complain. So did a number of the other women participants. Moose exploded at the other two men for their gender insensitivity. “They ended up in a complete shouting match.”
“They were actually shouting?”
“Well, maybe not quite literally shouting. But making no effort to disguise the fact that they were really pissed off.”
The display of rage however itself made many of the women so uncomfortable they left, taking with them a good portion of the non-Ya Basta! participants.
Someone called in an activist from the West Coast named Laura, repeatedly described to me as “a kick-ass gender sensitivity trainer,” who, after observing the group briefly, concluded that its dynamic was so deeply problematic that it probably wouldn’t be worth the time and effort to try to salvage it.
“And that was it. That was our last training. None of the other scheduled trainings have even happened.”
“Where’s Moose?”
“Finally, he just threw his hands up and said he was giving up on us. He joined a different affinity group, some people from Philadelphia.”
“Oh… I’m sure Betty really appreciated that. What about Smokey and Flamma? Emma? Where are they?”
“I haven’t seen them since. I don’t know. Someone said they might have left town.”
I also discovered that, when it came to the sympathies of the local socialist administration, Emma had been spot on. Far from welcoming us, they had been doing all the fear-mongering one might expect from a local government bracing for a major action—despite the fact that we had repeatedly insisted to them there weren’t going to be any actions in Burlington, just meetings. Local businesses had been warned of potential window-breakers, police patrols were everywhere; activists regularly found themselves being followed by unmarked black SUVs which seemed to serve no purpose other than to create a climate of fear and intimidation. That was the other thing I was hearing everywhere, aside from the Ramones music: scary stories. One car full of obvious Feds, had pulled up to Kitty and asked her if she wanted to jump in for a ride. Another SUV had chased Target through an alley. Someone had walked down the street in Ya Basta! gear and returned to his car ten minutes later to discover some enormous bruiser in a business suit examining the trunk. Several local activists had already reported mysterious break-ins.
After dropping off my bags at the Burlington IMC, and coordinating with the people who were going to be sharing my accommodations, I set off for the spokescouncil.
At the housing office, I’d picked up a flyer which explained that the spokescouncil was going to be at a place called “Billings Student Center,” on the University Terrace of UVM, not far from the center of town. The building turns out to be a huge turreted structure in red stone, looking somewhere between church and castle. Apparently, it used to be the campus library. There are already a couple of black flags and banners on the lawn outside. At the door, we’re asked to affirm that we are not police or working journalists, then peruse the usual tables full of documents, along with large black markers with which to write the legal and medical phone numbers (posted everywhere) on one’s leg or arm. The meeting itself is located in a large, circular room with a circular balcony surrounding it; too small to use for an actual theater, it must be some kind of campus meeting-space. Up on the balcony, apparently, are various offices of student clubs, including the student radio station, where there’s a small crowd of technical types—mostly IMC people—making use of the equipment. In the center of the big room is a big round wooden table; empowered spokes are sitting directly around it; everyone else is milling around behind them, sitting in clumps on the floor, or drifting in and out of other rooms. There’s no expectation that the audience should stay quiet during meetings—actually, spokes are expected to be continually conferring with their affinity groups, and members of affinity groups with each other. Though, in a room this small, the facilitators usually end up having to intervene periodically to remind everyone to keep it down to a reasonable volume.
The meeting has of course already started (have I ever actually witnessed the beginning of a spokescouncil?) though only about two-thirds of the spokes are already there. The facilitators, male and female, have arranged the usual pieces of butcher paper against a nearby wall and are writing out an agenda with colored pens. This is a real spokes so everyone is participating in constructing the agenda.
Looking for someone from New York who can fill me in on the situation, I spot Twinkie, munching on a muffin in the corner.
“So how have things been going?”
She pauses, draws in a deep breath, searches for appropriate words. “Could be a lot better. Yesterday a delegation of Mohawks came from Akwesasne, asking us not to come.”
“These were Band Council people?”
“There were seven or eight of them; a deputy chief, some people who put on a little ritual…”
“Really? I mean, like, a Thanksgiving ritual? Where they thank the Creator for having made the skies and waters and strawberries and everything?” (I too had been reading up around that time.) “You know that’s the standard Mohawk way of starting any important event. I’ve always wanted to see one of those.”
“Yeah, yeah, that’s exactly what it was like. They started with a Thanksgiving ritual. It was very beautiful. Then they told us not to come.”
“So there were people from the Council and Traditionalists? So is it,” confused now, “…the Traditionalists against the Warriors now?”
“No, there were people who said they were from the Warrior Society with them too. Progressives, Traditionalists, Warriors… It was kind of a disaster.”
I sat down nearby and started scribbling out initial notes: there seemed to be about 150–200 people, with fairly reasonable gender balance, something of an ethnic mix, though, I noted, absolutely not one single African-American in the room. No, actually, one. A West Indian looking fellow on the balcony. But that was it.
Laura, the gender sensitivity trainer, is also acting as co-facilitator with some fellow from Boston named Mark. As I started jotting meeting notes, she was in fact telling everyone that they’d been having big problems in this regard. However grudgingly, I was forced to admit she was pretty good at this.
Laura: I just wanted to say before we start that I’ve been really impressed by the respectfulness people have been showing in terms of the racial dynamics here. And this despite the fact we’re in a really difficult situation. In terms of the gender dynamics, we’ve been having some problems. So before we do anything else, let me just say: guys, please, check yourselves before you speak. If you’ve already spoken two or three times on the same issue and others haven’t said anything: step back. Give other voices a chance to be heard. If your point is really as crucial as you thought it is, then probably someone else will make it anyway. And if they don’t, you can always put yourself back on the stack. Remember: this shit is deeply internalized in all of us, so guys, please: be conscious.
We start as usual with a go-round, each spoke identifying themselves and the affinity group they represent.
Laura: Any more housekeeping items? No? Okay, several of the people who facilitated last night were also involved in prior negotiations with the Mohawks. We’ve given them a fifteen-minute slot to fill us in on some of the history, in way of background. Mac?
[People start searching for Mac. Someone on the balcony says he’s on the phone. There’s a brief huddle at the head of the table]
All right, so Lesley from NYC-DAN will take his place. No, wait, here’s Mac.
[Other people introduce themselves as part of the team: Twinkie, of AUTODAWG, Jessica from the Philadelphia Direct Action Group, Nisha, an activist from New York, who explains she’s not speaking for anyone but herself]
Mac: And I’m Mac. I’m with DAN and the People’s Law Collective. Hi, how’s everyone doing?
I’ve been the main person speaking with the Boots Clan and Warriors from Akwesasne and Tyendinaga Reserves. The main organizer I’ve been dealing with is Shawn Brant from Tyendinaga. I spent three years on the streets with Shawn in Ontario; he’s one of the most solid, dependable activists I know.
Back in January, we were working with groups in Canada to help move folks across to the other side—the idea was to shut down any border post that refuses to let us in. Shawn said he’d speak with the Mohawk community in Akwesasne, and eventually some of us went up to meet him. At the time, he framed it as a very strong action, opening with a statement about the bridge as a daily affront to their sovereignty, and claiming that they would do whatever it took to seize it.
As a result some people on our side put out some premature statements.
Meanwhile, Shawn went to the Boots, who are big in the Bear Clan at Akwesasne. Out of respect, he also approached the Band Council, which is the formal, elected body, but they became alarmed at the prospect of a possibly divisive action taking place on their lands.
So, when we went to a second meeting at Akwesasne, they made it clear, first of all, that the action won’t involve actually closing the border as the Band Council was concerned about that. We told them, sure. Later there were more concerns: at the third meeting, Harriet Boots came out strongly in support of the action, along with her husband John and their son Stacey. She wanted to ensure that we emphasized the terrible health conditions on the reserve—the fact that the local clinic tells women there not to breastfeed their children because the water there is so toxic—and the bridge as an affront to Mohawk sovereignty. She also said that, as their goal is to unify the nation, they wanted us to be peaceful and organized. That we shouldn’t talk too much on the reserve itself, but they were going to organize a fish-fry, then we would go to meet our Canadian allies halfway across the bridge. The idea was that, first, vehicles would pass lawfully, then, simply by weight of numbers, we could peacefully overwhelm the border authorities and everyone would be able to get through. After that, the Band Council said okay, but they registered some strong reservations.
Shawn told me a joint statement of support came out yesterday. The Wolf Clan is closer to the Band Council (there had been a kind of civil war between the Wolves and the Bears, who tend to work with the Warriors, over plans to build a casino some years ago) so they’ve definitely been suspicious.
Last night, though, they issued a letter of support—so it’s too bad some of the Band Council people and Brian Skidder came to our spokescouncil and urged us not to come. They told us that police showed them videos they claimed were from Seattle, but I think must have actually been from Prague, of people throwing molotovs and battling police, and told them this was the sort of thing they’d be bringing on their people. After the meeting, the delegates said that, after having actually met us and seeing how we treated one another, they recognized we were good people and they didn’t fear us any longer. But Brian Skidder still told us not to come.
I spoke with Stacey and Shawn this morning, and I’m trying to get hold of a press release they put out. They are still very much asking us to come—they want our support, they want to see a peaceful, safe action. They’re still having the fish-fry, they’ve invited us to it, and they also want to help us with crossing into Canada. I recognize this is not a simple action, but I believe in our action and believe it’s high time the anti-globalization movement does something like this, and establish ties to First Nation activists on both sides of the border.
Mark: Are there any clarifying questions?
Laura: …that is, for the team who have been working with the Mohawk organizers?
Jessica: I should also point out that I was at the second and third meetings at Akwesasne, and that this “statement of support” was really more a statement of non-opposition.
Woman: What’s happening on the Canadian side now?
Mac: Our allies in Kingston say they will be there on the other side of the bridge, they will be flexible and willing to help in whatever way they can. Oh—I should add there’s a rumor (and there are going to be lots of rumors; we’re going to have a hard time sorting all this out) that the police have already set up buses and two trucks along the highway on the other side of the bridge. That may or may not be true, but we have to assume the police will be there too.
Man: Our affinity group wants to know if the Wolf Clan was ever approached directly?
Mac: No, we felt we should let our allies deal with them. Which might have been a mistake.
Woman: I’m from the legal team and we’re prepared to shift to another crossing location if we have to. Also, a clarifying question: why is it that Shawn, who’s not actually from Akwesasne, is speaking for that community?
Mac: Shawn is not speaking for the community. He’s been an organizer for ten or fifteen years; he’s from a leading family at Tyendenaga; he went through the protocols to get the support of the Boots family, but nothing more.
Woman: My affinity group is concerned: will they still have to go through customs?
Mac: There’s a chance we will. We hope to overwhelm them, but we might not. The best we can say is there’s as good or better a chance of doing so here than anywhere else.
Man: If Shawn isn’t from Akwesasne, who is it from Akwesasne who actually does want us to be there?
Mac: I won’t guarantee numbers, but one of the most powerful clans does want us there. The Band Council goes back and forth, and the Wolf Clan is definitely against us. Our allies say we have ninety percent support in the community as a whole, but we don’t know what’s really happening there. I don’t want to tell you something that turns out to be wrong.
Laura: Okay, let me open the floor now to anyone who wishes to ask questions.
Famous: Hi, I’m Famous. I’m with the medics. I’d like to know whether we’ll have an escort as we approach the Reservation?
Mac: No, our allies are going to be concentrating on security on the reserve itself. There won’t be any actual opposition once we get there, but there may be before—there’s been some talk of police roadblocks. But that’ll be up to us to deal with.
Famous: No, I mean at the edge of the Reservation.
Mac: Yes, there will be.
Mark: Remember this is clarification on background history, not logistical scenarios.
Tony: Hi, I’m Tony, also with the medics. What impressed me about the delegation that came here last night were their concerns about opening wounds from the civil war. Would anyone be able to address that?
Mac: Well, our allies say this will be a unifying action, that they’re more unified now than ever. I can’t tell you who’s right.
Laura: Other questions specifically from spokes—not logistical now, that’ll be later. Right now, history questions that need to be clarified.
This is looking bad. Mac is a dedicated anarchist and normally one of the most open, friendly, people one could possibly imagine. His usual manner is so innocent and playful some find it hard to take him completely seriously. Now, trapped between his friend Shawn and the American activists, as he answers one question after another with carefully worded statements, he’s beginning to sound like a politician. Presumably, in his position, it’s almost impossible not to. After all, I reflect, isn’t this just what makes politicians talk like weasels to begin with: being caught between constituencies who want radically different things, trying to make everybody happy? But the audience is noticing, and many are not happy.
Woman: I suggest we talk directly to Shawn about this.
Mac: I’m still talking to him. To be honest, he’s getting very frustrated with our movement. He feels he’s had to hold our hand through this whole thing.
Laura: Any more questions specifically about the history of negotiations? No? Okay. As facilitators we’re unclear on what’s happening next. We were told we might be getting a phone call from Akwesasne, we might be getting a letter faxed in. So [to the team] do you have input? Help me here.
Nisha: Jodie, could you step up? This is your section on the agenda now.
[A woman named Jodie steps up.]
Jodie: Hi. I’m from Philly, I do a lot of work with Western Shoshone and other Native American groups out West. I was going to be holding a cultural respect training before the action, but it looks like we’re not going to have time for that. I’ve got a handout I was going to use for that (people can share it with their neighbors if there’s not enough copies) but, the main thing is: we’ve also got Russell Black here, of the Oglala Lakota. And I felt maybe first we should hear from him.
So, Russell, could you stand up and share a bit of your understanding of this situation?
A tall skinny kid appears, who looks like he might be about seventeen years old. He stands at the other side of the table. “I am here on behalf of my elders,” he begins. He then pronounces a brief prayer, and a slightly longer speech, emphasizing how his nation, the Oglala (still erroneously referred to as the Sioux) are divided by similar factionalism between the traditionalists and a so-called “pragmatic” group tied to the official reservation government, who are corrupt and really just agents of the federal government. Only the traditionalists have made a principled stand against genocide and violations of the earth… Everyone listens in rapt, respectful silence. Myself, I can’t help but reflecting this would feel a trifle more convincing if there hadn’t been traditionalists with the party yesterday telling us not to come. At the end, people in the hall react half with applause, half with energetic twinkling.
“No matter what we decide tonight,” another woman says, “we want to do it in a respectful fashion. We’ve been invited to a meal. Surely it must be disrespectful not to show up for it.”
Madhava, one of the IMC folk upstairs, announces we’ve got a call coming in from Akwesasne.
Then we seem to have lost it again.
“A very interesting piece of information,” remarks Laura as Mac and the technical people all scramble upstairs. “Our fax lines have been mysteriously jammed all day. We’ve been unable to send or receive anything. Plus the phone lines are uncertain. We’re trying to put the call through DSL …”
Techie Upstairs: I think we’ve got it on the PA system…
Mac: Ready Shawn? [crackle] Are you still there? [crackle]
Techie: Shit, this isn’t going to work. We’re going to have to use another phone.
[Much futzing about with equipment]
Laura: So give me some good news here, guys. Can we proceed?
Mac: [on a phone line with Shawn] How would people feel if I were to come down and repeated Shawn’s words
[Twinkles]
[Mac explaining the situation to Shawn]
Laura: No, don’t come down. Just do it from the balcony.
Mac: Okay. [from the balcony, begins repeating what Shawn is saying]:
First, I want to apologize for having to do things in this way. It would have been much more appropriate for us to be there with you, but just not possible right now. I just also want to say there’s a lot of bullshit going on here…
Someone: Um, can you repeat that, sorry?
[Much laughter]
Shawn [via Mac]: As activists, we share a common responsibility. “Free trade” is about the people being manipulated by the government. What happened at your meeting last night was us being manipulated by the native government. These people do not represent the best interests of the people of Akwesasne, and the people have reaffirmed yesterday their welcoming of Americans coming to protest the FTAA. We do not have Indian titles behind our names, but we carry the honor and integrity of, and are the true leaders of, the Mohawk Nation. That honor and integrity is reflected in the commitment we’ve made, and the fact that we have done those things we said we would do. These attempts being made to reduce our numbers by asking activists not to come are based on fear: the government knows they are not in control, that they are part of a system that has allowed our community to be poisoned, our children to be born with birth defects, our integrity and our culture to be lost. And now they claim to be working in our best interest to prevent people from coming.
We affirmed yesterday that we will extend the honor that’s required to people going to Québec City to legitimately dissuade governments from further free trade negotiations. We acknowledge that those who go to fight the governments that we fight shall be recognized for their commitment, because we share the same enemy. If people are dissuaded from coming, then that is by their choice, we have made a pledge and a commitment and we stand by that. You are all welcome in Akwesasne, and to the same degree that we have said in previous discussions.
All I can say is that I hope people will come, but I can certainly understand the confusion that’s been put in people’s minds by the people last night. But the people are with you.
[Wild applause]
After some vain attempts to keep the line open so people can ask Shawn questions, the connection collapses in hissing static and, from then on, no phones in the building could be made to work. Eventually we turn our attentions back to meeting logistics (with the time crunch, Jodie’s cultural sensitivity training, scheduled for 7PM, will have to be moved over another building at 8 or 9PM. Then there’s the problem of dinner…).
Laura: So. Have affinity groups actually brought proposals about how we should proceed from here?
[Indications from several that they have]
Not everyone has to, but if any do, we can try to sort out how the various proposals overlap and relate and hone them down to a workable list of alternatives.
Woman in Yellow: Here’s our proposal. We propose we should go to Akwesasne, but keep things open in our minds whether we’ll cross there or in another place. We should stay in contact with the Mohawks on the Canadian side, so they can tell us what’s happening there. We go to the fish-fry and reassess, hold a spokescouncil there.
Laura: Well, that’s one proposal. Awesome. Others? Oh, and bear in mind we can also develop alternative scenarios tonight—you can propose something new. So: any others? No?
Woman in Blue: Our collective made an alternative proposal after last night, when things seemed shaky. First, for the sake of solidarity with Mohawks, we should attend the fish-fry, if we’re still invited (we obviously are), so as to forge a working relation with activists up there and pick up others who will be coming to Akwesasne to cross. Then we should actually attempt to cross into Canada at a different spot.
The other possibility proposed last night was to join together with Canadians and any Mohawks who want to cross, and attempt to do so together at a different point.
Eric from NYC DAN: When was that other location to be decided?
Another Woman from that collective: I don’t think it would be strategically wise to say here. But there are definitely people working on it.
Laura: Also we have this. [Someone starts passing a printed version of the first proposal around the room; the spokes all seem to already have one]
Woman: Was there a proposal to talk to the Band Council?
Laura: Actually, I think that’s all we have now. You can offer friendly amendments—but, right now, let’s first move to concerns…
Enos: Hi, I’m Enos and I’m spoking for the Ya Basta! Collective, along with NYC DAN. I’ve heard two concerns from New York folk: First, that the original proposal to just go and cross, from before the delegation came yesterday, is still on the table, and no one’s discussing it; second, that it might be too difficult to make a decision once we get there.
Enos, is a radical cartoonist from New York, fortyish, with a long blonde ponytail and only the faintest trace of a Brooklyn accent. How he ended up our spoke is unclear to me; it’s not clear to what degree the Ya Basta! Collective even exists, at this point, though by now I notice there’s now maybe a dozen Yabbas in the room. It seems we’re reconstituting ourselves, at least as an affinity group. At first, though, I’m too busy taking notes to participate much.
Laura: Well, in that case, can someone restate the original plan?
Woman: [reading off the handout] That the caravan proceeds to the fish-fry; we meet there at around 12 noon; listen to two or three speakers and any other events our hosts have arranged; then, at 4PM, after we eat, we return to our vehicles, go to bridge (keeping one lane of the highway open as the Band Council has requested so emergency vehicles and so forth can pass through), meet Canadians at the center, mix together with them, proceed to the other side, and together approach customs.
Laura: Are there any other proposals that needs to be on the plate?
[Apparently not]
Mark: Okay, so the first proposal we’ve heard tonight is go to the fish-fry, keep contact with our allies in Akwesasne, reassess our support, reconvene the spokes, and decide there how to proceed. At any rate, that’s how it stands now—tonight we can certainly add further elaborations to it.
[Spokescouncil members raise hands]
Woman: I have a point of process: are we now trying to come to consensus on this proposal?
Mark: No, we’re not trying to come to consensus, but just to get a feeling for, I guess, which one to start with…
[Three hands shoot up around the table]
Woman: Maybe it would be better to start with a straw poll to see where we’re at, which proposal most of us are leaning to, then do a breakout so that spokes can consult with their affinity groups about how to proceed from there?
Mark: No, I think we really need to flesh this out. There will be sort of a breakout later, when we eat. Then we can all confer in more detail with our affinity groups.
Tony: If we did hold a straw poll, would that be of everyone in the room, or just of spokes?
Mark: I was assuming just the spokes. Unless someone wants to propose we open it up?
[No such suggestion emerges. Until…]
Enos: I’m concerned that this room really represents the bulk of the group that’s actually going to go. In which case we probably should just sound out everyone now that we have them in one place; because the more time goes by, the more people are likely to start drifting away. So the sooner we can confer with our groups, the better.
[Much twinkling]
Laura: Okay, I’m seeing a lot of support for that suggestion. We’ll do it that way.
Woman: Could you read through each proposal first?
Mark: Good, we’ll get a sense of the room, then have a quick breakout.
Laura: How long a breakout are people suggesting? I’m seeing two minutes… five minutes… ten… No, please, not the room, just the spokes… Okay, then, the feeling seems to be for ten.
Mark: Proposal #1 then is to go to the fish-fry and then decide; #2 is to go to the fish-fry, don’t cross, but invite other Mohawks to go with us to another crossing; #3 is the original plan where we all meet at the center of the bridge and try to overwhelm customs.
Laura: I see three hands of spokes who wish to say something. [Makes a stack]
Man with Blonde Dreads: I want to put out a proposal that we not go to the fish-fry at all and find an altogether different spot to cross.
Laura: Is there any reason this didn’t come up earlier?
Dreads: The matter was just brought to my attention.
Woman in Yellow: My understanding is that this is supposed to be a gathering just outside the reservation for us to meet with our allies, but also rally for community—Shawn was saying that it was going to be “child friendly,” a kind of party with balloons and games—an opportunity for them to hear us talk about free trade and then for us to mostly listen. Also, they’re making us vegan food—traditional corn chowder—in addition to the fish. Which is amazing in itself. I’ve never heard of such a thing.
Laura: I can see there’s a lot of energy here, but… someone has a process point over there. Yes?
Man: Yes, it’s about that last proposal. If I’m not mistaken, we called this particular spokescouncil to discuss plans for Cornwall. Now, of course, none of us are under any obligation to go to Cornwall if we don’t want to go, but if someone wants to talk about not going to Cornwall at all, shouldn’t he withdraw that from this spokes and simply call for a different spokes for people who don’t want to go?
Laura: Hmmm. [to Dreads] Do you in fact want to withdraw the proposal? Or not?
Dreads: Yes, I’d like to strike it then.
Mark: OK, any more clarification needed on first proposal?
Woman: If we did hold a spokescouncil in Akwesasne, would the spokes there include Mohawks?
[Much discussion. It’s not clear anyone knows.]
Enos: Ya Basta! have just passed information to me that there will be some members of the Band Council at the fish-fry.
Neala: The first proposal says, if we go, we should be “open in our minds” about what to do next. But, like Enos, I would really prefer the decision to be made earlier. We have no idea what things will be like there, whether we’ll even be able to hold a spokes.
Mark: Okay, but technically we’re still back on clarifying questions about the first proposal, not concerns.
Laura: Also, the crowd should not be speaking directly to spokes. The facilitator should. I know it sounds constrictive, but if we don’t do it that way, the spokes can end up feeling ganged up on.
Woman in Yellow: I want to clarify my proposal (that’s proposal #1 now). What we’re saying is the fact that Mohawks are willing to make us vegan food is an amazing, unprecedented show of hospitality. We must come.
Mark: So far, I’m not hearing any clarifying questions but only concerns and supporting arguments. Can I take that to mean we’re moving on to concerns?
Laura: I’m informed the answer to “will Mohawks be involved in the spokescouncil” is “if they want to.”
[She begins writing on one of the sheets of butcher paper on the wall, starting a column labeled “concerns.”]
Woman: Oops. I still have one clarifying question. Would it be impolite to go to the fish-fry and not to cross? Or has this already been asked, and Mac said it wouldn’t be?
Man: Also the idea of reconvening the spokes there, does that…
Mark: I will interpret this question as a concern, now.
Man: …would it go against respect?
Woman: Also, Justin just told me that there will be people coming from all over the Northeast who will be coming straight to Akwesasne, without passing through Burlington. Maybe several hundred.
Mark: That’s an appropriate use of point of information, but I’m still looking for any clarifying questions or concerns, here.
Enos: Concerning the first proposal: what will be the criteria for calling off the action?
Woman in Yellow: If people from the community don’t come, don’t speak to us… If we get a feeling we’re not wanted, then we leave as soon as we can.
Man: If we do cross, will that mean going through customs?
Another man: Is it that we don’t want to do anything on our own—it’s all up to them? We don’t want to do an independent disruption?
Fred: And, if we’re turned away, will we then go to an alternate site?
Woman in Yellow: The question was, what kind of border crossing will happen with each proposal? In the case of mine, #1, I think the answer can only be: whatever sort the Mohawks propose. Lucy, you’ve been in negotiations with people in Akwesasne. What do you think?
Lucy: I’ve heard no guidelines yet. Other than nonviolence.
Man: Mac told me it would be considered disrespectful if we just go to the fish-fry and then leave immediately.
Woman: If we go to the border, is it all or nothing? What if some of us get through and not others? Do we split up, or do we all turn back in solidarity?
Woman in Yellow: That’s a logistical decision; I think we’re doing logistical proposals after we finish this part.
Mark: So are there any other clarifying questions or concerns about proposal #1? No? Okay. How about #2?
[They restate the proposal ]
Enos: How would this be consistent with following the lead of Mohawk security?
Mark: Okay, that’s a concern.
[Laura writes it down]
Nancy: Hi, I’m Nancy from Pittsburgh. What does it mean to “invite” the Mohawks to cross with us elsewhere? Are we going to sit and strategize with them, or just bring the proposal to them already made? Because, if the former, there’s not much difference between the two proposals.
Woman in Blue [who brought the proposal ]: To me that’s kind of a question of semantics. I don’t know, but we’ll tell them they’re welcome to come with us.
Nancy: But the idea is we come with a preset plan?
Woman in Blue: I don’t see any other way to do it.
Laura: Okay, so we come with a predetermined plan.
Woman in Blue: Due to the situation, many of the people here have no other chance—so I would definitely say “all or nothing.” The first person who’s turned back, the rest of us go too, in solidarity.
[Many twinkles]
This was key: the emerging plan was to overwhelm the border post with sheer numbers, and that would only work if we insisted everyone go through together. So there was some sort of emerging consensus. This having been established, though, we all broke up to consult with our spokes over dinner.
The remains of NYC Ya Basta! was assembled in one corner of the room, with plastic plates full of some kind of vegan couscous and paper cups full of apple cider. It was 7PM. This was, I discovered, the first time that our collective had actually met, in any capacity, since the last abortive training. Moose was gone, but otherwise it was mainly the DAN people—the hardcore faction, never large, had by now completely disappeared. We went over the three proposals quickly and decided that, if we did go, which we probably would, it would be best to stick with the original plan and try to cross at Akwesasne. Proposal #1 felt too weak. Proposal #2 we could keep as a backup if things went wrong. There was also a strong feeling we should support the “all or nothing” principle. We empowered Enos to block any proposal that did not include it. Enos returned to the table and I got some more food, and tried to track down the people I’m going to be staying with to make sure of my housing situation.
A few minutes later, I ran into Kitty from Connecticut, who asked about the Ya Basta! crack-up. It was all very irritating to her, she remarked, as a representative of what’s probably the second largest Ya Basta! collective on the East Coast. “I mean, I recognize that the gender dynamics were fucked up. But just throwing up your hands and running off like that. Where does that leave us? Anyway, I have an idea. We still have all the gear lying around. Why don’t we try to have a meeting of everyone who was intending to be part of a Ya Basta! contingent and see what sort of resources we still have, what sort of numbers? Try to see if we can’t still pull something together?”
I said it sounded like an excellent idea to me.
Finally, anyway, I had a project. There was an empty conference room right next to the antechamber, with tables already arranged in a square. We located paper and a magic marker, put up a notice that there would be a Ya Basta! meeting at 10:15, then go off to start alerting possible interested parties.
By the time I got back to the main room and my note-taking, at 7:35PM, things were getting uglier. Apparently the straw poll had split fairly evenly between the three proposals, providing little guidance on how to proceed. Laura was writing concerns, one at a time, on the wall behind her, trying to see what the sticking points are, whether a proposal could be patched together that incorporated all of them. It was beginning to look more and more though like we would end up backing #3—the new argument being that, if we were to show up and not attempt to cross, we would be insulting the Warriors who had arranged the crossing.
Enos: Look, we’re never going to be able to do anything that won’t offend someone. And, yes, sometimes that person who we’re going to offend will be a member of an oppressed group. Maybe we should just get over it.
Laura: Could you speak more clearly, so I can write?
Mark: Also, we’ve been hearing a lot of the same points made over and over, so let me ask you: If you’re on the stack, but someone else voices your concern before you do, please don’t repeat it. Just pass and let the next person speak.
Woman in Yellow: Well, in response to the question, proposal #2 was proposed in response to concerns of people last night. Maybe Russell can enlarge on why I feel it crucial to attend the fish-fry. Russell?
Russell: I fear there’s a lot of confusion about First Nations. In my Nation, if a warrior society was to invite you formally, and offered food and a prized dish, if you were to reject it, that would be the utmost disrespect. I would strongly urge you to support the Warrior Society, as they’ll be on the forefront of struggle, and I’ll go representing my society as well. In my society, there are also “progressives” claiming to speak for all, but the traditionalists should always be the strongest voice.
Man: I feel it’s very important when we get there to see what kind of support we really have in the community before we commit ourselves.
Another man: My affinity group absolutely won’t get through customs. I am still waiting to find out whether we’re being asked to or not.
Mark: Point of information: are there are other spokescouncils, other actions, for those who don’t want to go to Cornwall? Is anyone organizing alternatives? No?
All right, are there other concerns?
Woman: What will happen to any other people who come to the fish-fry if we go off?
Neala: In response to Enos’s point earlier: if we have to offend anyone, it shouldn’t be our allies.
[Scattered applause]
Man: As far as I’m concerned, this whole process is racist. We should have been talking to all parties from the start. It’s unfortunate how we’ve allowed ourselves to be misled by people downplaying the conflict in the community, and I know it’s unfair to say any one person is racist, but a lot of the points I’ve been hearing here are just bullshit. I’m not saying we should go home, or not go, but I really feel obliged to point this out.
Laura: Okay, can I ask that we not identify anyone else’s point as “bullshit” or do similar emotional spin-work? Look, we’re all frayed. But we have to remember why we’re here: We’re here because we’re all trying to figure out the best thing to do in a difficult situation. Also, I’m a little worried people are behaving more irritably because they’re hungry. So, people, if your spoke has not been fed yet, check with them, there’s still plenty of food.
Enos: Look, I’m sorry if I’ve said anything that offended anyone. I understand that we’re all here for the right reasons. I never meant to imply otherwise.
Mark: We must give each other the benefit of the doubt for honesty and good intentions. Consensus is not the same as majority rule; it’s not a competition. We are all working together to figure out the right thing to do.
So, that being said: are there other concerns about proposal #2?
Ariel: Should I read the statement in which we explain to our Mohawk allies why we would be crossing elsewhere, and inviting them to come along?
Mark: Well that sounds relevant, but I think it would be more appropriate to read it later on.
Woman in Yellow: I’m concerned that making such an invitation to the Mohawks would be interpreted as contradicting the original idea of our supporting them. Now we’re inviting them to dismiss their own action?
Laura: [still looking at the list of “concerns” on the wall ] Will this fit into the category of going to their land and ignoring their initiative? Because that concern has already been raised.
Woman in Yellow: For me, it would be the ultimate negation of why I came here, which was to support them.
Enos: If people have worked out alternative locations, I’d hope we’ll hear about them. I keep pointing out that both #1 and #2 presuppose an alternative route but does one even exist? We can’t just improvise this later. We need a plan!
Woman: Remember, the reason it first seemed #2 was most desirable was because we don’t have a clear sense of what the community there wants. I came here to support Mohawks, but clearly there’s a diversity of desires. And some of the concerns I’ve heard ring deeply. I’m swayable…
This could be going on forever. Some insist they are here to support the Mohawk Nation as a whole, and wonder how to do it. Others are here to support our allies, even though it’s not clear who or how many they actually are. Organizers are using cell phones to try to contact Shawn and the Boots family, occasionally getting through long enough to make additional clarifications.
Sizing up the room again, I’m beginning to understand what the problem is. This isn’t just an ordinary crowd of activists. Or even anarchists. It has a distinctive Black Bloc feel. Warcry and Target’s call on the IMC had been far more effective than any of us had anticipated: just about every anarchist who knew for sure they would not be able to get through the border legally, some from as far as LA, were now stuck here in Burlington. On the one hand, there was a strong contingent—Twinkie, for instance, was one of them—who felt that once we had committed to work with Mohawk activists on Mohawk issues, our responsibility was to do right by them, and if that meant we didn’t get to go to Québec City, then so be it. For them, to think of the Mohawks instead as a means to an end, as a way to get through to Canada, was yet another example of arrogant, racist exploitation. Others felt equally strongly that they hadn’t come all the way from Iowa or South Carolina just to have lunch on a reservation, where most people didn’t seem to want them anyway.
I drift in and out, alerting people about the upcoming meeting. In the main room, the spokes are slowly moving towards accepting the original proposal, but no one is particularly happy about it. At 9:48, Enos is almost shouting. “How, exactly, has this plan totally changed in the last two hours? Now they’re asking us to submit ourselves to customs!” Mac is insisting that the plan hasn’t changed, the idea is and has always been to overwhelm customs. By having people come from both sides of the bridge, by having sufficient numbers, we can create a logistical nightmare for them and, eventually, they’ll just wave us through.
Mac: Maybe I’m dense but I don’t see how that’s different than what Russell is saying. And I don’t think the Mohawks will be upset with the idea that we all go through together. Yes, they can detain people at border posts, but it’s not all that common, and if we try to get through at another point along the border, we could end up in jail there too.
Mark: All right, so the plan is we try the original plan, but we have a backup. I see a lot of nods whenever I hear the words “all or nothing,” so do I take it that’s our decision too. If anyone is turned back at first, we all leave and fall back on our contingency action?
[Huge twinkle]
Mark: So that’s the proposal. Are there any more concerns.
All right, we can finally move to consensus. Stand asides?
Blocks?
There we have it.
[Huge cheer rings out]
Someone: Let’s have a round of applause for our facilitators. You guys did an amazing job.
The plan being approved, we move to the next leg, which is logistics. There are two new facilitators. There are speakers from Legal, Medical, and Transport. The legal team starts handing out forms. I head out to meet Kitty and prepare for what everyone’s now calling the “10:15 meeting.”
Then, something interesting starts happening. Somehow, it’s not at all clear when, the plan for a Ya Basta! meeting transmogrifies into something else. It becomes a meeting, sponsored by Ya Basta!, for everyone who feels stifled by the structure of the spokescouncil, and who wants to talk about strategies for actually getting through. When I first walk into the room, I’m startled: there’s at least sixty people already around the table, a pretty substantial chunk of the activists still in the building, and more trickling in steadily. To some degree, I think many came just for an excuse to sound off. The first ten minutes were an endless gripe session, with an emphasis on just how little they or some members of their affinity group were prepared to submit themselves to customs (endless priors, outstanding warrants, etc.). There was one girl who was seventeen years old, who had run away from home a year before. She and her family had since reconciled, but she was still officially listed as a missing person; presumably, if she tried to cross the border, not only would she be held, but anyone in the same car could be arrested as her kidnappers. Many are especially bitter after having abandoned other, perfectly viable options, such as unpatrolled stretches of forest or obscure rural roads, or chances to cross the border weeks before. Everyone accepts that, yes, we have no choice but to attend the fish-fry. Solidarity is important. Anyway we made a commitment and we have to respect our allies, even if, as some suspect, they hadn’t been completely honest with us. But just what are our chances of overwhelming customs, anyway? Who has real information? And if it’s not possible, isn’t it about time we start working on some kind of Plan B?
I run off to locate Eric, who was, at the time, NYC DAN’s de facto media working group (much as I was for Ya Basta!, except he had some idea what he was doing). Eric had been keeping up with developments from the tech booth, and he gave me a quick briefing as to what he understands the official plan is now. After the fish-fry, we will all march to the bridge. It will be a peaceful march, with 50–100 Warriors and their families, including children, mingling together with activists. Then, hopefully, we overwhelm them. A lot of people are skeptical it’ll work. But it seems the best we can come up with.
As the gripe session continues, I dart in and out trying to find people (Twinkie passes by: “What’s this?” “It’s a meeting of people who want to prioritize actually getting to Québec. Um, want to come?” “No!” She rolls her eyes in exasperation.)
Finally, I locate Mac, who looks jolted to discover upwards of eighty people in a meeting he didn’t even know was happening. “Um, what is the relation of this meeting with the spokescouncil still going on in the next room?”
People ignore the question and launch into questions of their own. One Black Bloc kid from the West Coast with bad teeth is asking what is likely to happen if someone is detained:
Bad Teeth: If someone is detained trying to pass through the border—which I would definitely be, if I submit myself to customs—what’s most likely to happen? What will the Warriors do?
Mac: I would advise you to stay towards the back. If we overwhelm customs, then you won’t need your ID. Otherwise, people in front will be turned back and we’ll all turn back in solidarity.
Bad Teeth: But what would the Mohawk Warriors do? I know I’ll be towards the back. I don’t need you to tell me that. That’s obvious. I want to know if the Mohawks have told us what they’d do?
Mac: They’ll cross along with us. Obviously, they’re not going to attack the border post or anything like that, but as a collective we need to protect each other and, if they turn people back, then fuck ‘em. We’ll just go somewhere else.
Someone: I don’t get it. The Band Council asked us not to block the bridge, to keep a lane open. If we’re going to try to overwhelm customs, we’ll obviously be effectively blocking the bridge. So we’re already defying their will. Why would taking it a little further be so different?
Mac: Look, I don’t have a magic answer, all I know is that as a collective we’re stronger than as individuals.
Someone: Yeah. And also a hell of a lot slower.
Kitty: My personal feeling is that we’re here to come up with an alternative plan of what to do if we get turned away—because if we say “all or nothing,” then, let’s be honest here: we’re probably going to get turned back pretty quickly. Does anyone want to speak to that?
Someone else: Well, does anyone have a map?
Mac: I’ll go get one.
I step out with Mac for a second as he does so, just to check in. I can hardly imagine what a nightmare this all must be for him. “The problem” he says, “is they all want magic answers. There aren’t any magic answers. Anyway, what exactly is the relation of that meeting to the spokescouncil?”
I say “I think people realized that, at the rate the spokes is going, there’s no way we’re going to have a plan down by 11PM when the building closes. So they decided to constitute themselves as an autonomous working group of people who really wanted to get through.”
“Oh. Well, I guess there’s no reason they couldn’t do that.”
“Anarchy in action.”
Before long, everyone inside is looking at maps and discussing logistics, but we hardly get started before someone sticks his head in to tell us it’s 11PM and we’re supposed to be out of the building. People gather on the steps. As cars drive by playing Ramones songs, Eric tries to kidnap me to join with a couple other members of the newly created Media Working Group, to blast-fax some kind of statement from Russell. I tell him I can’t, I had promised to meet up with my housemates at 11:30. The media team heads off to find an open coffee shop. By 11:30, people are still drifting out of the building (no one had actually come to lock it yet) and I finally find my people—Rufus, Warcry, Chango, plus now also Betty the Dancer—who it turns out have all been sitting for some time in a park not far away, under an elm tree, sharing clove cigarettes, waiting for our ride. Kitty, and a large cluster of mostly black-clad activists, set off in another direction, to work on our Plan B. They look rather obvious with their two giant red-and-black flags.
Finally our car arrives, with two women in it already. We all somehow manage to squeeze in.
Most of us are just exhausted. The driver, Sara, a woman in her late twenties, is venting about hygiene issues. She launches into a long diatribe about activists who refuse to wash.
“Oh, yes, the ‘Cruddies,’” said Rufus, agreeably.
“Maybe I’m just old, but I think it’s unsociable. It’s disrespectful of others.”
“What cruddies?” I hadn’t noticed anyone who gave off a noticeable odor at the spokes.
“You know, all those kids with the dirty dreadlocks and crusty clothes, who are pleased with their own body odors? They’re all like eating beans and breaking wind and smelling and refusing to wash?”
“Oh.” Since there seemed little point in arguing, I remark that several groups representing people of color that DAN had worked with in Philadelphia had always made an issue of that sort of thing. “Smelly white anarchists” had become a kind of code word—a form of racial privilege being waved in their faces.
But Sara is not much interested in the racial aspects. “Don’t get me wrong,” she continued. “I understand the appeal. When I was sixteen I was exactly the same way. I was in love with my own personal smell. It was like… well, natural. That’s what human beings are actually supposed to smell like. There’s a certain kind of integrity, I do understand that. But come on! There comes a point where you have to start thinking about other people.” It emerges that, after living for some years as a squatter, Sara had finally gotten a real job in town, with some sort of nonprofit. With a salary, benefits, everything. She was still trying to get used to the new life.
“It’s a phase, I guess. I mean, are there any unwashed activists who aren’t teenagers?”
Her friend Janna, a Catholic Worker from Denver, however, is very much on the racial issue. “I’m still trying to figure out if I should be really angry about this whole thing. I think I really should. The whole process was completely racist.”
“Racist in what way?”
“Racist because we were just working with one tiny group, and didn’t even try to contact anyone else in the community. It was always ‘the Mohawks’ say this, ‘the Mohawks’ want that. As if they’re all like one person. Really they were just talking to two or three people the whole time. Notice how we were even doing it in the spokescouncil. ‘The Mohawks.’”
Now, this is cutting a bit close to home. “Okay,” I said, “you certainly have a point about the language, I’ll give you that, but…” I paused for thought. “Well, what would you have wanted the organizers to do?”
“They should have talked to everyone in the community.”
“And went behind our allies’ backs? I don’t know. It’s really easy to start throwing around words like ‘racism’ when somebody fucks up. But what if we were were dealing with a community of, oh, I don’t know, French people? Or Swedes or something? Would we have behaved any different? Wherever we go, we’re always going to be talking to the most radical elements in the community (and actually, in this case, it was them that contacted us). If we had started making independent overtures to Mohawk politicians behind their backs, people would be saying we were racist for doing that.”
“Well,” she concluded, “maybe the racist accusation is unfair. But I’m still angry.”
“I’m not real happy myself.”
Eventually, they dropped us off at the home of our host, an elderly Quaker woman who had volunteered her house for activists. It was a cozy, carpeted two-story house with a terrace so full of potted plants it was a little like a greenhouse, and a parrot flying around free of its cage. About eight or nine people arranged sleeping bags on the floor. We commiserated over the death of Joey Ramone. Warcry won permission to use the computer in the study upstairs; a while later, she asked me to come up and look at the draft of a story she’d been working on about Timothy McVeigh. Eventually, I drifted downstairs again and ended up in a fairly long conversation with our host about the Society of Friends. Her husband had recently died, but she had children and grandchildren in Burlington and the vicinity. She was from an old Quaker family and had been active in the Church and local activism all her life. So is it true, I asked, that Quaker meetings work by consensus? Because anarchists’ do too, and I’d heard that ultimately a lot of what we do was inspired by the Society of Friends. She launched into a fairly detailed description of how Quaker meetings operated, interrupted only occasionally by wondering comments by me (“Wow, that’s so similar.”). People, she said, sit in a circle. If the spirit moves them to they speak, proposals are made and any one person there can, in theory, block a proposal if they feel sufficiently strongly about the matter. Blocks rarely actually happen, but, in principle, anyone has the power to derail any proposal and the fact that everyone knows that they can is itself enough to ensure they act responsibly. Yes, I said. Precisely the way we do it, too. Giving everyone the power to block is like telling people, “We dare you to act responsibly.” And, generally speaking, unless you’re dealing with a total wingnut, that’s all it takes.
She continued: in a Quaker meeting itself, there’s always a facilitator, who is not supposed to give his own opinion, but simply run the meeting, listen, and repeat if something needs to be clarified. (Uh, huh. That’s just like us too.) Participants can speak only to the facilitator. There’s no cross-talk.
“Wait, you mean no one is allowed to speak to each other at all?”
“No. Conversation is for secular events. A meeting is a sacred event, so you can only speak to the facilitator.”
“Oh, that’s… really different. In our meetings the facilitators keep stack—that is, watch for who wants to speak and keeps count of whose turn it is—but it’s not like you can only speak to them. Usually, you are speaking to everyone, but you are allowed to make a direct response to someone else’s point. So, you can’t do that in a Quaker meeting?”
“No, you can only speak to the facilitator.”
“Because otherwise it would be a secular event.”
I reflected for a moment—between the Thanksgiving ritual, Russell’s prayer, the Quaker notion of meetings as spiritual events—whether there was some significance to the fact that the “process” anarchists are so obsessed with is always, elsewhere, seen as partaking of the sacred. Creating accord is the creation of society. Society is god. Or, perhaps, god is our capacity to create society. Consensus is therefore a ritual of sacrifice, the sacrifice of egoism, where the act brings into being that very god. But I was far too tired, and my brain too fuzzy, to do more than make a mental note of it. Anyway, one thing I did know is that, if this action was going to be anything like the other ones I’d been to, I’d be getting at best two or three hours sleep for the next few nights, and maybe nothing. I mumbled some pleasantries and went to bed.
The next morning we got up, did something or other in the IMC in Burlington, picked up something else at the Quaker Meetinghouse, full of activist magazines and flyers, and set off on the caravan. We’re only rolling at 10:46AM.
There are five Ya Basta! vans out of the twenty or so that make up the caravan, which is followed by a rented bus. Warcry had brought huge tinsel streamers from some IMC event to festoon the vehicle. As long as it’s going to be a festive event, she says, we might as well look the part.
The caravan has a comms system, walkie-talkies distributed every couple vehicles or so, and we have one, but the comms people spend most of their time monitoring the state troopers who escort us out of town, and appear, periodically, with cameras filming us at different points along the way. Aside from that there’s not much to communicate but periodic messages like “gorgeous waterfall coming up on the left” or “good music on 105.7.”
In the van, I’m flipping through an endless stack of documents downloaded from listservs and web pages before I left. There’s one about the difference between American and Canadian legal systems and how it might affect protesters. There’s a document about how to deal with the effects of tear gas and pepper spray, and two different documents about hypothermia. There’s a document with pointers on how not to make an ass of yourself on a Mohawk reservation, and another, meant to give activists some background on nationalist sensitivities in Québec. Unlike Montréal, the average man or woman on the street in Québec City cannot be assumed to speak English. They will not take offense if your French is poor, it is much better to make the attempt than to simply accost them in English. My favorite is a circular by the “Québec Medical Fashion Brigade” with detailed advice on clothing:
Today’s well-dressed militant in Québec City for the Summit is wearing long underwear made of the new synthetic materials like soft warm polyester that WICKS away sweat from your skin. Much of the Summit’s perimeter is perched on a hill, and climbing up streets to reach it, or running here and there, will make you sweat. And sweat next to skin can make you cold…
You should have many loose layers that can be removed if you get hot, and put back on when cold… Your outer layer should be water proof. We HIGHLY recommend a cheap rain suit — not only will this keep you dry against the rain or snow, but also keep those nasty pollutants like tear gas and pepper spray from being absorbed by your clothes. As a bonus, it will block the wind too. If you wear fleece, make sure it is beneath your rain gear if you are in a chemical weapon risk zone (near the police). Pepper spray & tear gas gets sponged up by fleece, and then released over time into your face. Yuck! For that extra sexy look, try out those cheapo translucent ponchos folded up in a little plastic bag—it will look like a condom, and you will get extra kudos for your safe sex message!
We understand the objections you might have to not being able to get rain gear in basic black. However, your plastic rain suit is a perfect medium for spray painting (black, right?), magic markers, and all your stickers. Black garbage bags can also work against water and chemicals…
There follow suggestions about gas masks, goggles, the use of bandanas soaked in vinegar as protection against tear gas. I check myself for extra socks, layers, etc. The caravan is moving almost unimaginably slowly, something like 45 MPH on a two-lane highway, and no one is quite sure why.
“I don’t suppose we could at least put on our Ya Basta! outfits for the fish-fry?” someone asks. “It’ll probably be our last chance, since there’s no way we’re getting any of that through customs.”
“I don’t think so. Mac was saying if we even show up looking like we’re prepared for action, it might be taken as aggressive.”
“Well… maybe we actually will overwhelm them at the bridge.”
No one seems to think this is particularly likely.
Hours go by. We move to small rural roads, rolling past abandoned farms and gun shops, going even slower. Someone is explaining his activism all goes back to a childhood realization that the Power Rangers were really evil. Periodically cops film us from the side of the highway, some in uniform, others plainclothes. When we pause for a pit-stop by a river, most of us come out in masks, and some of the men gallantly form a human wall to allow the women some privacy from the cops on the other side of the road, who insist on trying to film them while they pee. At least there are no roadblocks. Finally, after a seeming eternity, maybe around 4PM, the radio crackles “we have a visual on Akwesasne.”
There was not, as it turns out, anyone to greet us at the main entrance to the reservation, though this might, I reflect, have something to do with the fact that we are by now something like three hours late for a party that was supposed to start at 1PM. Anyway, the scene is desultory. Everything about Akwesasne seems desultory. The caravan proceeds through the reservation to occasional curious stares but there is almost no one even on the porches.
Finally, we pull into a very large space of grass with tables set out for the fish-fry. There are no children. Actually, there is hardly anyone at all. Just a few dozen activists who had been waiting around since noon, a few members of the press, and what looks like four actual Mohawks. Later it grows to six. The food, served on paper plates, is dished out by what appears to be a skeleton crew; everything is minimal; the Boots family is there (Stacey does indeed have his hair cut in a Mohawk, which is somehow strangely gratifying). There are a couple other Warriors who show up now and then to talk to them, apparently scouting police positions over the hill, but that’s about it. It is obvious we have been totally outmaneuvered. The community is absent. Even the location turns out to be an empty lot that is, we later learn from one of the journalists, technically just over the line and not quite on the Reservation itself.
Several activists wander around trying to locate someplace to pee; there are no porta-potties or obvious outhouses, and no one is sure whether it would be considered desecrating Indian land. Finally, someone tells them that the chiefs have said it’s okay to go in the underbrush, as long as we’re relieving ourselves in the opposite direction from the Reservation. I grab some fish with Warcry, until someone calls us over to speak to a news team from PBS Frontline. Warcry shifts instantly, effortlessly, from grumpy to passionate, extemporizing a little speech on the connection between indigenous oppression and the FTAA. I stand by, slightly bemused, and make a little statement of my own about solidarity, then wander off again.
A little ways off, I find Twinkie sitting by herself, on a wooden bench, crying.
I sit down next to her. “What’s the matter, Twinkie? I mean, I’ll admit the scene is a little depressing…”
“No, it’s not that,” she said, trying to smile, even as the tears continued. “It’s the fish.” There are remains of a pickerel still on her plate.
“The fish?”
“I’m a vegetarian. My family is from Thailand. We were brought up very strict Buddhists.”
“Then, why did you eat it? I’m pretty sure they had a vegan option. Cornmeal porridge, no?” Twinkie was, though I hesitated to point it out at that moment, something of an expert at extracting the fish and crab meat from dumpster-dived sushi rolls.
“Well, I thought it would be a gesture of solidarity. After all, here we are on their land. And they made them for us specifically. And, when I was actually eating it, it was okay. But afterwards I just started crying.”
I considered making some kind of philosophical observation about how everybody was feeling caught in double-binds of late, but decided not to. Instead I said: “Really? I didn’t know your folks were from Thailand. I thought I’d heard someone say you were from the Philippines!”
“Huh? No! We’re from Thailand.”
“Were you born there?”
“I was pretty young when my family came over.”
There is a brief ceremony, starting with Stacey Boots giving a little speech from the top of the van. He talks about the history of Native Americans welcoming and protecting foreigners who came with peaceful intentions. “And now, I guess, we’ll protect you.” A Latina activist from New York gets up and gives a speech about how the FTAA is just the latest manifestation of a five-hundred-year campaign of conquest and genocide that began with Christopher Columbus. A folksinger climbs on top of the van with a guitar and plays something called “The Indian Wars.” After one or two spontaneous spoken-word performances from activists, the caravan reassembles and we head up the ramps toward the “toll plaza” where, apparently, we’re going to actually try to cross the border.
Our van is toward the front of the caravan, maybe five cars from the front: me, Warcry, Betty, Rufus, Sasha the documentary filmmaker, and his girlfriend Karen, who is helping him on his video project, since Sasha is at this point going basically as an activist. Karen, on the other hand, is nothing if not a media professional, armed with expensive equipment, and will be documenting everything he does.
There was a long and extremely slow-moving line of vans leading to the border station, which was a cookie-cutter, white, one-story structure with what looked like at least a hundred police officers of various sorts gathered outside, behind numerous barricades. So much for the idea of proceeding directly to the center of the bridge and overwhelming them on the other side. Everyone was going to be checked on this side. We had promised to keep a lane open so emergency vehicles could get through, but it immediately filled with people on foot. At first, as activists began marching up the ramp, the event had some of the quality of a festive march: there was someone on stilts, there were drums, scattered musical instruments, a few attempts at rousing chants. But it was entirely unclear whether this was actually an action. Then, everything stopped. Warcry goes out to scout and never returns. I stick my head out to see if I can catch any signs of our supposed Warrior escort, and aside from one or two who had been on the podium, didn’t see anyone. Certainly no families.
Almost nothing we had been promised had actually materialized.
Betty heads off for a cigarette break, then returns. I end up in a long conversation with her about gender issues, the disastrous Ya Basta! trainings, and the resultant crack-up. “It’s not like I actually want to cut off a bunch of little boys’ penises,” she says. “I mean, I understand that little boys need their penises. I really don’t mind if they feel the need to wave them around a bit. All I wanted was to get a word in edgewise. But, as soon as I raise the issue, they all start screaming at each other, and now they won’t even speak to each other and I feel like it’s all my fault.”
“Were they really screaming at each other?”
“Okay, maybe not literally screaming…”
After a while. “So what do you think? Should I go try to find out what happened to Warcry?”
“Sure,” says Betty. “We’ll probably be sitting here for another hour one way or the other. Go stretch your legs. Catch some air. It’ll be good for you.”
Karen volunteers to come with me to see if she can get some useful footage. Sasha gives her a kiss and takes over driving.
I climb out and stroll up towards the toll plaza. As I pass, Moose is taking a cigarette break a couple vans up, looking sheepish, trying to avoid eye contact. There are no Mohawks anywhere in sight now. Neither is there any sign of postal workers, steelworkers, or in fact anyone at all on the Canadian side of the border—though there do seem to be a crowd of Mohawk teenagers behind a chainlink fence in what looks like a huge basketball court some ways beyond the border station, with Mohawk cops patrolling in front of them. A dense crowd of activists is assembled right in front of the border station; some angry, some hoping to talk their way through. There are flags and banners. One woman in black has climbed halfway up a traffic pole, drumming. Periodically, someone tries to start a collective chant. Bad Teeth tries jumping up and down starting a chant of “Days of Rage! Days of Rage!” and a few take it up, but it doesn’t really catch on, and fades back into gripes and muttering.
Finally, I see the reason for the delay. The first van is stopped at the border post; the Canadian police have taken out every single bag that was in it and arranged them all on the asphalt, and seem determined to go through every object in every single one of them. Enos, the driver, was one of the first to submit himself to customs—probably not a good idea, since he had already been denied entry to Canada during the April 1st action two weeks before. After a few questions, his name is put through a computer and he’s asked to step into a shed-like structure to the side. A minute or two after that we see him being led to a police van, in plastic handcuffs, with a world-weary, exasperated look on his face, a kind of visual sigh.
Warcry is standing with Target and a small cluster of IMC journalists. “Did you see them take off Enos?”
“So why are we just standing here? I thought it was all or nothing? Let’s get the hell out of here and go to someplace we can actually cross.”
After a brief parley, we decide we need to do something more dramatic. We’ll gather together four or five people who are definitely not going to get through, but probably also won’t be actually arrested. Warcry and Target are probably known to every FBI agent in the US, but have no outstanding warrants; I am carrying no passport or official ID; Madhava and Jenka had been denied entry on previous occasions. We decide we’ll walk up and formally submit ourselves together. Then, when we’re turned back, we can try to turn the line around and head for another crossing.
Karen offers to document the event on video.
The five of us link arms and advance. Karen, looking every inch the professional videographer in a neat beige jacket, her blonde hair tied back, is filming us from up ahead as we advance.
As I step up, I try out a line that had first occurred to me in the van—more than anything else because I’m curious to see what the response will be. “I do hope you bear in mind,” I say to the first policeman, looking him in the eye, “that we’re only doing this to save your health care plans.”
“We’re not unaware of that,” he says. “That’s one reason we’ve decided to go so easy on you guys.”
Oh. Slightly surprised, I wait as they send us each to speak to a different officer. Warcry goes first. Then me. Suddenly I’m being interviewed by a beefy Canadian border officer in a flat white cap.
“Purpose of your trip to Canada?”
“I’m going to protest the FTAA conference in Québec City.”
“So, when was the last time you were in front of a judge?”
“A judge? Well, last year I was on jury duty for a couple weeks.”
Slight impatience. “You know what I mean.”
“As a defendant? Never. I’ve never stood before a judge accused of any crime.”
He nodded. “All right then.” Then gestured me on to a younger officer, a pimply kid who looked like he was fresh out of high school. The kid asked me for my passport.
“Sorry, I didn’t bring one.”
“Driver’s license?”
“No. I’m from New York. I don’t drive.”
“A lot of people from New York don’t know how to drive.”
Karen has somehow talked her way over to the other side of the post and is now filming everything from Canada.
The kid is clearly a bit flustered. He goes off to confer with the beefy guy, who appears to be his commanding officer, then returns. “Well, what do you have, then?”
“I have a university ID,” I said, pulling it out of my wallet. It was, actually, a Yale faculty ID but nowhere on the card did it actually say “faculty.” He probably assumed, as most people did, that I was a grad student. He also didn’t seem to care. It had a picture and the picture looked like me.
“Okay,” he said.
“I mean ‘okay.’”
I was startled. “You mean…?”
Pointing. “Just move along to that stop sign over there.”
“Wait… You mean I’m through?”
This was one outcome I had never anticipated. I had never even stopped to consider what might happen if I actually got through. The pimply officer was starting to look impatient. Karen was already over the border in Canada; there was an endless line of people waiting behind me, and equally endless-looking bridge in front.
“Well, look,” I said. “I have an agreement with my friends. I promised I wasn’t going without them. Can’t I just wait for them?”
“You can’t wait for them here,” he said. “This is the processing area. You’re going to have to wait for them there, in Canada.”
Since “Canada,” at this point, seems to consist of a short piece of tarmac eight or nine feet away, this doesn’t seem too inherently unreasonable. Karen comes with me, taking some wide-angle shots of the caravan, which is still immobile on the American side. I’m trying to figure out what happened to Target and Warcry, but they’re nowhere to be seen. I think they might have been taken inside for questioning. After a minute or two, though, another border policeman shows up to tell me “You can’t wait here inside the border post. If you’re going to wait for someone, you’ll have to walk over there to that stop sign,” pointing again to a sign by the edge of the road.
We comply. The stop sign, however, seems to be a very large stop sign, because it ends up being two or three times as far away as it had seemed from the border station. Now we’re on a stretch of asphalt far from anything and, for all my squinting, I can’t make out a thing that’s going on at the American side. There’s still a crowd of school kids behind the fence in the basketball court, and we wave to them, but we’re too far away to really see if they wave back.
It was at this point that the huge Mohawk cop with the taser shows up, driving a buggy. One could tell he was a Mohawk cop because on his shoulder is a patch reading “Akwesasne Mohawk Police.” Unlike the police at the border station, who ranged from businesslike to almost friendly, this one looks extremely unaccommodating. He informs us that we’re on reservation land and we’re going to have to move off it and start walking across the bridge. Karen points the camera at him—usually a fairly effective way to elicit better police behavior. He’s entirely unimpressed.
“I’m sorry, officer, you see we’re just here because the border people told us we had to…”
“You’re on Indian land! You’re not wanted by the community. We want you out. You will start moving immediately across the bridge.”
The presence of the taser struck me as a very compelling argument. Anyway, halfway up the access ramp there was another little post and I could make out a couple of activists—they could only be activists, from the way they were dressed—milling about in the same sort of confusion as we.
“Well, you want to come along?” I asked Karen.
“Seems like I don’t have a lot of choice.”
“Well, presumably they’d let you back. And Sasha is still back with the caravan.”
“True. But Sasha would want me to at least try to get some footage from Québec City. I’ve actually several hours worth of blank tapes and batteries in my bag. And this might be our only chance for one of us to get there.”
We start walking up the ramp and discover that the activists we had seen there were, in fact, Kitty from Connecticut along with a couple of her fellow Yabbas—a slender, slightly effeminate Asian kid named Lee, a woman named Andrea—all looking as puzzled as we about having gotten through.
We started walking towards the bridge. After some small confusion, when one group of police told us we couldn’t enter the bridge, and another told us we couldn’t go back (and negotiating access to a bathroom at a small station at the base of the bridge) we took stock.
Needless to say all the Yabba gear was back in the van. I hadn’t even brought my shoulder bag, with my notebooks and other essentials—so convinced had I been that I would not get through. I had the one pocket notebook that was in my pocket at the time; a cell phone with maybe a couple hours juice (no recharger). Otherwise, I had basically what I was wearing: a black hoodie that claimed to have “arctic fill” lining, a black bandana in the pocket, military pants over thermal underwear, three different cashmere sweaters layered over a fairly nice red formal shirt (I find it is useful to have something presentable for passing through police lines). That was it.
My friends were in much the same fix. No one had any gear or baggage. Except Andrea who had a sleeping bag.
“So much for Ya Basta!” says Lee.
“Yeah, it looks like we’ll all be doing Black Bloc,” Kitty agrees.
“So we are going?”
Kitty gazes back towards the toll plaza. “Well, if we go back, what would that mean? The caravan is moving so slowly there’s no way we’ll be able to even try to cross again until sometime tomorrow.”
“There is a ‘Plan B’ though, isn’t there? I mean, you guys did come up with something after the spokes?”
“Well, yeah, that’s the thing. We did. We figured it was important to keep it secure, so only two people actually have the maps and know all the details. Problem is, one of them is me.”
“The best-laid plans of mice and men.” smiles Lee.
“Well, what’s the chance both of you got through?” I suggest.
Karen has gone off to shoot panoramic footage off the side of the ramp.
“Anyway, it’s not like it was all that amazing a plan. Probably anyone with a good map could have come up with it.”
We decide to at least try to check in with our affinity groups, but I’m the only one whose phone is working. Which is somewhat miraculous. Everyone else’s cell phone conked out hours before we even got to Akwesasne—no one was quite sure whether because of police interference or because we were just too far out in the boonies. I spend a few minutes trying the numbers for Betty, Rufus, and a variety of people on the legal team. In each case I’m sent immediately to voicemail. The same thing happens when Kitty uses my phone to try to contact other members of her own affinity group.
Finally, she says, “I guess it’s kind of obvious what we’re going to do. We can stand here and agonize over it for another hour, and then go, or we can get going now. What do you say?”
“I’m game.”
Everyone nodded.
And so we began to proceed across the bridge.
The Seaway International Bridge turned out to be almost three kilometers long, and was made up of two different structures, connected by a little island in the middle. The road was mostly empty. Very occasionally, a vehicle would pass by, usually a pickup truck. Occasionally, too, Mohawk police buggies zipped by, apparently just to keep us jumpy. We spent a lot of time gazing down into the St. Lawrence Seaway. The view was extraordinarily beautiful. There were inlets, islands, tiny little boats, chalet-like cabins here and there along the shore. Most of it gave a sense of pristine natural beauty, the contours of a coast hardly changed since the first arrival of human settlers ten thousand years ago. Intellectually, I knew this was anything but true: in fact, one of the themes the Mohawk organizers had wanted us to emphasize was environmental racism. There was a GM plant built right on the border of reservation land on the US side (in fact, I thought I could just about make it out in the mist), and the place was so consistently used for toxic dumping that mothers in Akwesasne were told not to breast-feed and babies were occasionally born with their intestines outside. But from the bridge, all this was almost impossible to imagine. It just looked grandiose, beautiful.
The sun was setting by the time we arrived in Cornwall.
I’m still not sure what the town of Cornwall looks like; I never saw it. What I saw was a kind of loose mall at the end of the bridge, a small, low open space with retail outlets perched on eminences to either side. At the very foot of the bridge, we passed two lines of riot police, maybe forty of them in all, geared up and just standing there, facing a small crowd of perhaps a hundred or two hundred Canadian activists who were clearly the remnants of a much larger crowd. Some were masked. Most looked tired. Both sides seemed slightly ridiculous, dwarfed by the vastness of the bridge. We never saw the promised tea, but we did pass one banner from the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty, welcoming us. Karen dutifully filmed it. Everywhere there were people with cameras but very few seemed to be our cameras. We passed Shawn Brant, standing on the back of a pickup truck making some sort of defiant declaration for Canadian television. He looked just like he did in the photographs.
Scattered among the Canadians were other Americans who, like us, were trying to come to terms with the fact that they had gotten through. Gradually, people began clustering, found a spot on a strip of damp grass near the highway to form a mini-spokes to assess our situation.
Our group split up temporarily to get food. I picked up a cheap chicken sandwich at a take-out joint up the hill, investigated the Walmart. I had never been in a Walmart before. It was vast. I picked up a small bottle of Tylenol with codeine, which I remembered one can get over the counter in Canada, figuring it might come in handy later on. Returning, I discovered the meeting in full session, with some forty American activists sitting in a circle, trying to put together a list of names to convey to Legal so people’s affinity groups back in Akwesasne will know they’re okay, they got through, and to go on without them. We have to hold the meeting masked because we’re soon surrounded by TV cameras. When one extremely self-righteous CBC video journalist refuses to stop filming people’s faces, a few of us are finally obliged to strongly imply we might be inclined to spraypaint his lens. Karen films the confrontation, then uses her camera to document his every move as he eventually starts packing up his equipment. There’s nothing that annoys TV journalists, she explains, more than filming them.
Finally I’m assigned to call in the list on my dying cell phone. I leave a recording on the legal office’s machine in New York and a couple other places, and hope it somehow gets back to people.
By this time it’s dark. The mall is almost empty. Even the cops are gone. There were a few vans when we arrived, most were already leaving during the spokes, including one or two full of Mohawk activists—almost everyone who was actually there at the fish-fry. Mac and Lesley appear and disappear. For a while, I’m afraid we won’t find a ride, but we do, with some School of the Americas protesters, one of the only groups at Akwesasne whose vehicle actually got through. By 10PM we’re on the road to Québec City.
At this point I’ll return to diary mode. What follows is built up largely from notes quickly jotted at the time, fleshed out from memory and later checked against those of other participants, and published (usually web-published) firsthand accounts.
I have always had a stubborn inability to sleep in moving vehicles. Kitty and the Connecticut crew quickly pass out in the back of the van. Karen and I, insomniac, end up having a long conversation with Janna, the Catholic Worker from Denver, who is there with the SOA contingent. Janna is actually a pagan, but for radicals in that part of the country, she explains, there’s not a lot of choices. “I’d have joined Pagan Worker if such a thing existed.” She was gassed in Seattle and had been in and out of hospitals for six months afterwards. On the third day of the protests, she explained, they brought in the National Guard, who started using CS, a form of tear gas so powerful only the military is allowed to employ it (when the Serbian army used it against rebels in Kosovo, the US government called it a war crime). One pregnant woman lost her baby; another activist died of complications some months afterwards. Janna’s doctors told her that her lungs had been seriously damaged, and that she should avoid any future exposure to such toxins at all cost.
“Which made her slightly crazy, I admit, to be going to Québec City. But some things are just too important.”
The SOA people drop us off at Laval University, on the edge of the city. Both New York and Connecticut Ya Basta! already have sleeping spots reserved for us on the floor of the main gymnasium. A teenager working the late-night desk points us in the right direction—yes, he remarks, the university has been quite generous with their facilities. “They were afraid we’d occupy the campus.”
The gym looks like it’s about the size of a football field. Its shiny hardwood floor is covered with perhaps two thousand sleeping activists, arranged in geometrical clumps separated by walls of bags and backpacks. We pick our way through the bleachers (also covered with sleeping bodies), eventually locate our appointed spot, D17, which is sectioned off with white tape, and toss our meager possessions on the pile.
The Connecticut kids never go to sleep, though. After almost an hour setting up, washing, and conferring, Kitty announces: “I know it’s really fucked up, but we’ve kind of decided we’d better start looking for some gear or we’re going to be completely useless on the streets today.” The three of them, Kitty, Lee, and Andrea, have pooled and are counting out their money, which comes to around forty dollars. I lend them a credit card and they vanish in search of supplies. This does, at least, mean that Andrea, who had been wise enough to carry a sleeping bag, leaves it behind (there was some discussion of using it as padding, but we conclude it would be too annoying to carry it around). Karen and I arrange it as a kind of long pillow, throw down our jackets and sweaters as mattresses, and grab a couple hours sleep.
Almost everyone is starting to get up. Groggy activists are yawning, stretching, fumbling for toothbrushes, searching for the bathroom. Karen and I decide to head down to the IMC to get Karen an Indymedia pass. This way she can be filming in some sort of official capacity. It might, conceivably, afford some slight protection against arrest. This requires padding about in the halls of Laval—one of those grey modernist complexes with vast fluorescent halls that make you feel like you’re underground even when you probably aren’t—with cups of bad vending-machine coffee, looking for some table with maps and information. Eventually, we find one, manned by a couple of bleary-eyed students who try to explain the local bus system.
Happily, buses are still running; though we never quite figure out the ticket system, and it looks like bus conductors aren’t bothering to collect them anyway. We follow the map up towards the IMC, which I vaguely remember from my last visit. Just a block away, we encounter a miracle. There, on the corner, plain as day, is an Army/Navy store. It’s still open! And there, in the plate-glass window, large as life, is a gas mask. I dash in and ask if they still have any in stock, and—equally miraculously—it turns out that they do. Precisely one. Forty bucks Canadian. And it’s one of those good, Canadian military gas masks, too, with the filter on the side, not like the crappy civilian-issue Israeli gas masks from the first Gulf War everyone complains about, where the eyes fog up and the plastic isn’t even shatterproof. This one is thick black plastic, with a dozen straps on the back in black with fine yellow stripes that are to my eyes, at that moment, strangely beautiful.
We also each pick up a camera bag.
The IMC (no one is calling it the CMAQ any more, at least, in English) is located on a cobblestone avenue on a very steep hill—so steep, in fact, that the building it’s in is two stories on one side and five on the other. It appears to be largely empty; you enter through a recently refurbished storefront area that looks like it’s temporarily attached to some radical group (it’s unfurnished except for a couple chairs and posters on the wall). Visitors have to proceed through the empty offices then head downstairs to the IMC itself—still half empty, though there are a number of media activists sleeping in corners and about a dozen more playing with equipment, or pasting up lists of tasks, collective rules. I glance at one sheet on which participants can assign themselves to cover different events (the operation has, as Madhava predicted, been successfully democratized). At the front desk is a short, bearded, gnome-like fellow who seems to be engaged in a prolonged flirtation with the two young women at the computers behind him (they do little but mock him, and he seems to take great delight in their mockery). He snaps a digital photo of each of us and then cheerfully remarks that because of some sort of computer glitch, it’s been impossible to print new press badges all day. He’s working on it. After about half an hour, we finally do manage to secure badges. I get one too: after all, I will definitely be covering this story for In These Times, a Chicago magazine I write for. Karen and I both sign solemn statements saying we agree to the IMC principles of unity, and to contribute at least an hour of our time to some sort of work for the IMC at some point in the future. “Don’t worry about that right now,” remarks one sleepy activist, “but we’ll probably be needing all sorts of help over the next day or two. Just check back in.”
Then, armed with gas mask and press badge, we head back to the university.
All the fuss about defending the Convergence Center turns out to have been something of a red herring. Once the idea of converging on the Plains of Abraham had to be abandoned for fear of preemptive attack, the decision was to fall back on the university. The university, however, is seven miles from the perimeter. It’s going to be a very long march.
By the time we get there, there are already thousands of people, most scattered across a vast open quadrangle near the gym where we’d slept, preparing for the CLAC/CASA Carnival Against Capitalism march. Almost immediately, I run into people I know. Sam, active with the New York IWW and DAN Labor, had not been with the caravan but had come to Akwesasne independently, and somehow got through. He had hitched up with a carload of radio activists and independent journalists: two couples, Shawn (not to be confused with Shawn Brant, the Mohawk organizer) and Lyn, Ben and Heidi. They are mostly in their thirties, which makes them—like me—rather old by activist standards. Since we’re all separated from our usual affinity groups, we decide to constitute ourselves as a new one, which I dub “the Akwesasne Refugees.” After a brief huddle, we come to a quick consensus about our parameters and role. We will follow the main action, acting partly as reporters, partly as participants. Our participation will be red/yellow in orientation, but we’ll concentrate on providing support rather than direct confrontation. We will stay mobile, try to avoid arrest, separate when we care to, but if we do, always establish times and places to meet up afterwards.
Happily, Shawn has secured a place to stay: Heidi has a friend Pierre who is building himself a house in the Lower City. It’s unfinished but perfectly serviceable if we don’t mind sleeping on the floor. Shawn also has a car.
Now, all this puts me in a rather odd situation because I am now, effectively, in two different affinity groups: since I’m also a de facto member of the Yabba group, even though this now consists of three kids, all around twenty years old, who have gone off to join the Black Bloc. Well, I figure, it will give me a certain flexibility to be able to go back and forth.
We select a large green banner near a woman on stilts dressed as the Statue of Liberty, and decide that if anyone wanders off, this will be our reconvergence point.
So I wander off, notebook in hand. Karen breaks out the camera.
This part of the campus was all huge quadrangular spaces and concrete, with a distinct lack of greenery. At the moment, however, it was filled with an enormous variety of colored banners, furled and unfurled, some just solid unusual colors—salmons and lavenders—but also endless variations on red and black. Everywhere, young people were sipping bottled water or cups of bad microwaved coffee, milling about, sitting in circles, playing snatches of beats on drums made from inverted five-gallon water bottles, fiddling with gear. The weather was still crisp, but gave every sign of wanting to turn into a genuine spring day. No cloud in the sky. The snow that had covered much of the city a month before had melted. I set out in search of Ya Basta! people, without much luck. At one point, I saw a cluster of men who looked, from a distance, like a Tute Bianche affinity group, but it turned out they were actually all dressed as the Québec City mascot “Bonhomme,” in smiling Santa-style masks and dirty white jumpsuits.
Jaggi, with an amplified megaphone was going around to each cluster of people to announce that the GOMM parade was to start moving at 12:30PM to the lower city, the CLAC/CASA Carnival Against Capitalism parade, due to leave at 1:00PM, was to proceed down Avenue René Lévesque because the Plains of Abraham had been determined to be a trap.
I grab him for a second.
“Hey, David,” he smiles. “So where’s Ya Basta!? How was Akwesasne?”
“Kind of a bust. We didn’t exactly make it through. As for New York Ya Basta!, at the moment, I think I’m kind of it.”
“So everyone else was turned away?”
“We’d made a decision it would be all of us or nothing.”
“Huh? Why did you do that? We need all the bodies we can get out here!”
“Well, because…” Come to think of it, why did we do that? I shrugged. “Solidarity. It seemed to make sense at the time.”
Jaggi had time to give me only the briefest rundown of what emerged from the last night’s spokescouncil. GOMM had their own parade, which would include SalAMI people, and various Trots. They were going to carry out pure Yellow, classic civil disobedience, with lockdowns and the like, below one of the security gates. The CLAC parade, much bigger, would be Yellow (but not “safe Yellow”) and also include a Green contingent. The plan is for Green Bloc to veer off before we got to the fence and occupy the area even further down the hill from GOMM, centered in a zone called Ilot Fleuriot beneath the highway overpass, and including the neighborhood of Jean Baptiste. Everyone else will proceed directly to the wall.
Then he ran off.
The Black Bloc at this point is at 250 people, maybe less. Mostly wearing black hoodies, though there are some in military-style gear or even vinyl raingear. All, of course, are in black. Most have gas masks pulled back on top of their heads, and black bandanas tied around their necks. They are mainly lounging about, at this point, smoking or napping, but there’s a huge red banner in the front of what is to be their column, and all sorts of red and black flags scattered around. Not far away is a woman dressed as the Statue of Liberty, on stilts, and a little further, a Medieval Bloc with tin pan hats and potlid shields. I am pleased to discover they do, indeed, have a catapult: quite a big one, twenty-five feet long. Around them are a variety of flying squads which seem to me half Black Bloc, with gas masks and bandanas, sometimes even hockey padding, only in cheerful colors, not in black.
A fair number of people in fact are already masked up; not so much for security reasons (there seem to be no police anywhere) as because they have, by far, the coolest bandanas ever: which, if folded in half, cover the bottom half of your face with a life-size picture of the bottom half of someone else’s face. I start noticing them everywhere: they come in red, orange and yellow.
Ben already has one, in orange. He proudly displays it: one side is the happy side, with a big smiling face; the other has a face with its mouth taped closed behind barbed wire.
“Yeah, apparently Reclaim the Streets, London, shipped over at least a thousand. They were handing them out earlier, but I guess you missed them. Story was they were designed by this old guy who used to work with the original French Situationists. Or something. I’m not completely sure.”
Inscribed on the margin, in French and English, are the following lines:
We will remain faceless because we refuse the spectacle of celebrity, because we are everyone, because the carnival beckons, because the world is upside down, because we are everywhere. By wearing masks, we show that who we are is not as important as what we want, and what we want is everything for everyone.
The big surprise is our numbers, which everyone is saying seem significantly higher than expected. I keep hearing numbers like five thousand, maybe even ten. There are no police anywhere in sight, though here and there are clumps of legal observers, easily identifiable in their bright yellow vests.
Jaggi keeps dashing up and down with updates and announcements; “In Ecuador, they’ve occupied the Canadian embassy in solidarity with us!” There are apparently also border actions going on in Mexico and people blockading a bridge in Chicago.
Finally, slowly, lumberingly, the Carnival Against Capitalism gets under way.
Maybe twenty minutes into the parade, there’s some kind of altercation when a university security guard tangles with someone on the front lawn of a building by the parade route. I arrive as people are trying to de-escalate, and never find out what exactly happened. The house’s owner and an eight-year-old boy are standing right there next to their porch. Someone is yelling at him: “Get that kid back in the house! It’s not safe with all these cops around!” Someone else tells me the guard freaked out and drew his gun (only to be immediately surrounded by activists with video cameras), but it wasn’t clear what had sparked the incident to begin with.
Shortly thereafter (circa 1:50PM), there’s another minor tangle when some TV journalists try to drive a car through the crowd. Marchers swarm around it, some pound on it, others lay down in front. “He was an asshole,” people told me, but not exactly how—I’m guessing he was just arrogantly trying to push through. Eventually, the car pulls back to a side street and the march continues.
At first, we’re passing through a purely residential area, all family houses and the occasional small brick apartment block. There’s not a commercial establishment anywhere in sight. Chants are in French, English, even Spanish. Most are extremely familiar: “Ain’t no power like the power of the people cause the power of the people don’t stop!” “Who’s streets? Our streets!” “El pueblo, unido, jamas sera vencido.” Others would become so: “Sol! Sol! Sol! Sol-i-dar-i-té!”
Karen checks in, she has been ranging up and down the parade getting all sorts of useful footage. There are cameras everywhere, but this time, they’re almost all our cameras. Even the people photographing us from the side of the road seem not cops but ordinary citizens.
Marches, I note, are always somewhat accordion-like. They have a tendency to stretch thin over time, which means we have to stop periodically so everyone can reassemble their affinity groups. The Black Bloc, never large, is by now already becoming more diffuse. I take advantage to work my way into the middle and finally locate my Connecticut friends: who are now part of an affinity group of some six or seven people, having located a few other former New England Yabbas. They are calling themselves La Resistance (later it becomes La Resistance II, when they discover the name is already taken). Kitty has given herself the action name Kid A, though everyone keeps forgetting to use it. Lee—a strict vegan—is calling himself Cheesebacon, and Andrea is still just Andrea. She’s the only one who has a gas mask (it had been wrapped in her sleeping roll). The others sport newly acquired green military helmets and a variety of other gear they’d picked up in town earlier. “Thanks so much for the cash card,” says Lee, handing it back to me. “You’re a life saver. I promise I’ll send you back the money.”
“Oh, don’t worry about the money.”
“No, really. I promise I’ll get your address after the action and I’ll get it back to you.”
Whoops all around as the march stops.
Nobody around knows why.
The Black Bloc are marching immediately behind what seems to be some kind of Marxist group, carrying a dozen identical red flags emblazoned with images of US political prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal. You can tell the Marxist groups because, like union folk, they tend to wear some kind of uniform. In the States there’s a group called the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade, who come to big actions in Black Bloc attire, except all in identical T-shirts under their hoodies and all wearing the exact same red bandana—looking so perfectly like anarchists that you knew they couldn’t actually be anarchists, because, even though the whole idea of black blocs is that everyone is indistinguishable, no group of anarchists would ever really be dressed exactly the same. I don’t see any equivalent here in Québec City (though, I later learn they were in fact there, mixed in with the Black Bloc). There are, however, many sections of the parade that obviously represent one or another socialist group, usually identifiable by matching T-shirts and the fact they carry professional-looking, printed signs. The larger socialist blocs are conducted by marshals with matching arm bands, patrolling the perimeters, linking arms when the march stops. Even the smaller groups usually have a leader with a megaphone, often walking backwards, leading them in chants. This, of course, makes them stand out from the crowd, while the anarchists, with their hand-painted signs and banners, mostly blend in—giving one the vague sense that everyone not affiliated with a particular, identifiable group is most likely an anarchist of some sort or another. In this particular march, this is also probably true.
I sit down on the street for a second to watch the show. After the Mumia brigade passes, and the Black Bloc, comes the Medieval Bloc with their catapult. The catapult is followed by a wooden cart full of stuffed pandas and other soft toys to be used as projectiles. Then come the autonomous elements in all their affinity groups, their signs and flags and banners an infinite anarchist heraldry of every conceivable variation on red and black. (My favorite, a crimson heart on sable field, which I saw repeated with slight variations six or seven times, sometimes alone, sometimes accompanied by the caption “ANARCHY = LOVE”). There were signs: Autonomez Vous (Autonomize Yourself), Betail en Revolte (Cattle in Revolt), and dozens of plays on the FTAA/ZLEA acronym (FTAA, Forced To Accept Aristocracy). There are Radical Cheerleaders and Raging Grannies, jugglers, stilt-walkers, and at least one man on a unicycle. At one point, I detect a group chanting “Ya Basta!,” spot a Ya Basta! sign among them, and quickly close in—but they turn out to be some sort of Zapatista support group, in T-shirts without any sort of gear. They are immediately followed by the SOA folk wearing skeleton masks, with an enormous green banner.
The only thing missing is giant puppets: I’m told several were carried out the night before for the torchlight parade, but they’re hidden away now, waiting for the labor march tomorrow.
Someone announces we’re ten minutes from the wall. We’re starting to see stores now, mostly shuttered.
An activist in an Easter Bunny suit is trying to throw candies to a group of children watching the parade from an apartment terrace. He becomes an instant celebrity: the “bunny guy,” everyone calls him, as in, “Hey, did you see the bunny guy?” He is not however to be confused with the other “bunny guy,” a student who actually carried his pet rabbit with him during the march. Bunny Guy manages to land a few on one terrace, and the children eagerly scoop them up.
Onlookers still seem guarded, though their numbers increase. Activists are banging on street signs as they pass, more loud than particularly musical. Here and there are clumps with actual musical instruments.
Still not a cloud in the sky. In fact, it’s becoming quite hot. I’ve been stripping off layers steadily, and those geared up—such as, for instance, my Black Bloc friends—are really beginning to feel it. People are calling for water. I’m sometimes with the rest of the Refugees, who’ve positioned themselves behind and on the edge of the Black Bloc, sometimes exploring the parade, occasionally touching base with Karen. La Resistance, geared to the hilt, wants water too, so the Refugees scour the streets for someplace to buy some (we did decide we were going to do support work), but without much success. Eventually, I locate a convenience store that’s open, but it’s only letting people in in groups of two, with some guy posted at the door to lock and unlock it each time. Shawn and I wait in line for a while, but realize that, by the time we get in, we’ll have lost the parade entirely.
Shawn, who has been monitoring the local media for some time now, is amazed by the complete absence of police. “For months they’ve been waging a terror campaign, telling everyone we’re going to destroy the city. Now look! Have you seen a single cop? At any point? If anyone had actually wanted to, we could have burned down this entire neighborhood.”
“Maybe they’re hoping someone does, to give them an excuse to attack.”
“Maybe. But my point is: either they knew they were lying when they tried to convince everyone we were a threat to the city, or they don’t really give a shit about the people they’re supposed to be protecting.”
We pass a construction site. A small crowd goes up an alley made by two chain-link fences, but they’re not, as I first guessed, going to yank up a stretch of fence to carry with them. Instead, the men and a couple women pull on their masks and start breaking and gathering bricks and rocks. A (mainly female) chorus stands above them chanting “We’re Gonna Fuck Shit Up Tonight!” in slightly accented English.
They’re not, in fact, in Black Bloc attire, but appear to be students, or maybe just local teenagers. Actually I have no idea who they are, but I’m guessing this would have to be the Red Bloc.
Some Black Bloc’ers are carrying a mattress with them, as a kind of giant shield. Somehow, there’s now a truck ahead of them, just past the Mumia battalion, playing some sort of French rap music. Mac and Lesley come bouncing by, masked, in military garb. We exchange pleasantries. Then they disappear again.
The parade stops periodically. Starts again.
The Avenue de Erables is the point where the parade is supposed to split into two columns, Green and Yellow. The Green group will march north up Avenue Cartier, which is two blocks north, and then enter the working-class neighborhood of St Jean-Baptiste that lies on the steep streets that slope off just to the north of the perimeter. Heidi, who has been doing radio interviews up and down the parade, explains that the neighborhood itself, along with the area further north, around the highway, has been declared a Green Zone. Puppeteers and street theater groups will occupy the area and put on performances for the local community groups, who are working closely with us. (CASA had been going door to door in Jean Baptiste for months now with flyers and petitions, explaining what was going to happen.) Such was the plan. At this point, though, it seems not many Greens are actually leaving: even the dragonfly drummers—a theatrical group with diaphanous dragonfly puppets bouncing over their heads—and other obviously Green groups are continuing with us for the time being. Meanwhile, as we pause, someone in a food truck seizes the opportunity to provide a quick snack. Everyone is passing around plates of pasta. We grab some, but pass most of it to La Resistance.
While we are waiting, I head back to the convenience store with Lyn and successfully buy several bottles of water. As I’m heading back we hear rumors three squads of cops have been sighted heading our way (none materialize).
Finally, we’re moving. It turns out that, all that time, we were only a few blocks from the wall. Passing Avenue Turnbull, the march enters the area we had scoped out so carefully during our last visit. We pass Grand-Théâtre de Québec, entering a small park that is soon to be known to many of us as “Ground Zero.” The park is mostly just a huge lawn with some hillocks and a few small copses of trees here and there. At the far end is the wall, with its three-foot concrete base and seven feet of chain-link on top of it. It runs along the next north-south street, the Rue d’Amerique Francaise, then curves back sharply to the north. Squinting, I notice it is already covered in most spots with ribbons and images and sculptures woven into it during a women’s action the night before. The base has been liberally spray-painted.
In the middle of the park is a line of cops, maybe forty or fifty of them, ranked out in full riot gear. We never saw any police that day who weren’t fully armored. These ones seem to be there to protect access to a checkpoint/entryway opposite the northeast corner of the park. Otherwise, there’s nobody around. Even the two media trucks with satellite dishes sticking out of them seem unattended. Yellow surveillance helicopters rattle overhead.
The parade begins to pour into the open space. Everyone is marching directly towards the police. The police hesitate (one can only imagine what it might feel like to be in a detachment of forty-odd riot cops watching several thousand anarchists march directly at you). Then they turn around, march back behind the checkpoint, and we sweep into the park.
Next to me someone is shouting angrily in French and tossing a half-full bottle of water at the retreating cops. A companion takes him gently by the arm, as if to say: “We all know what’s going to happen. We shouldn’t be the ones to start.”
The Black Bloc isn’t at the head of the march. The vanguard is completely heterogeneous, though it includes some of the best prepared: many in one or another form of padding, some in helmets and shields. As I pull up to the front, there’s already one guy in a yellow jacket who’s scrambled up to the top of one section of the wall near the checkpoint (it does not, in fact, have barbed wire on top). He’s swaying back and forth, trying to use his own weight to make it wobble. A crowd converges around him with grappling hooks—or, really, they’re fist-sized, nut-shaped hooks attached to long strong cords. Others set to work with wire cutters. A faceless line of police, all in gas masks and battle armor, stand impassively, maybe thirty feet away inside the perimeter as the first panel comes off its concrete moorings and collapses to the ground. The police do nothing.
Before long, everyone has found some empty portion of the fence. Mostly, the procedure is like this: small teams with ropes will use hooks to attach them to the chain-link, then everybody streams in to help pull. When the wall starts to give, people will climb on top to force it down. By the time I arrive, there are eight or nine sections down and I have to move northeast of the checkpoint to find a spot where I’m needed. I end up pulling on the same rope as Mac and Lesley and one insanely large Mohawk Warrior (I’m later told such individuals are referred to on the reservation as FBIs, “Fucking Big Indians”) who probably has the strength of the three of us combined. Nobody is even wearing masks at this point. I, like many people, have my gas mask perched on top of my head. When our section of the fence comes down, we move on to another one. At one point, a section comes down directly on top of my head, and those of a couple people next to me. We all laugh, two of us shake hands, then we move on to the next spot.
Soon, twisted pieces of downed chain-link fence are scattered across the edge of the perimeter. For some weird reason, the cops are still doing nothing, just standing there. Apparently, they had orders to resist any attempt to enter the security zone, and are taking their orders extremely literally.
Finally, a small squad of activists, I guess about twenty of them, assembles for a charge. To me, it seems completely insane, but maybe they have some kind of plan. If they do, I never find out, though. Because, almost the moment they begin to sprint towards the police, pepper bombs start exploding all around them. Some start stumbling, fall; within seconds, the entire contingent pulls back in disarray.
From that moment on, for the next two days, it was continual chemical warfare. Police started firing up and down the wall at teams still pulling sections down (about 150 feet had been completely cleared at this point). Tear gas canisters started bouncing, spinning, exploding all around us. I pulled on my gas mask; so did about half the people there. (I saw at least a dozen makes of gas mask, Israeli, Czech, Belgian, Canadian, some kind of weird Russian thing with a long tube flowing down to a pouch strapped to your belt.) Others were using scarves, bandanas, whatever was on hand. I saw people fumbling with visors and plastic swimming goggles as tears and mucus streamed down their faces. At one point, as I looked for a new position on the wall, a pepper bomb must have gone off right next to me. Unlike the tear gas, it went straight through my gas mask and I was suddenly blind and couldn’t breathe. I stumbled back out of range, into the open air of the park, eyes still burning and unable to focus, gasping for breath, and wandered in a circle for a moment until I found a clear spot, pulled off my mask, and sat down on the grass. After maybe a minute, I was basically functional again.
The park was by then full of clusters of people, moving at different speeds in different directions; it was also spotted with increasingly numerous clouds of gas. At first, they dissipated fairly quickly: there was a strong breeze which, to everyone’s amusement, was blowing back directly on the police. Here and there were small groups of activists sitting in circles on the grass on patches of higher ground, engaged in earnest consultations—Yellow affinity groups, I’m guessing, trying to figure out what to do. For most, the decision seemed to be to stay in the park and create as much of a carnival spirit as possible, despite the chemical assault.
By the time I was back at the fence again, a few minutes later, it had turned into a stand-up battle. After laying down a wall of gas, the police apparently tried to advance, only to be driven back by a rain of rocks. Masked figures close to the perimeter, now marked only by the battered concrete base of the former fence, half of it toppled, were still lofting rocks and bottles at them when I arrived. There were a couple pacifists up there, for some reason—at least, a couple women were angrily shouting, “Stop throwing shit!” The cops were by now sheltered behind a line of plastic shields, firing tear gas canisters and plastic bullets directly at them. The pacifists beat a hasty retreat.
Me, too. I fell back on the park and jotted down a few notes.
[from notes I took during a quiet spell ]
The police at this point are still hopelessly outnumbered. Rock throwers appear whenever they try to advance, but otherwise largely seem to hold their fire. Nor does anyone attempt to advance on the shattered perimeter.
By this time, gas canisters are coming down pretty constantly, not just near the perimeter but everywhere. They’re falling like mortar rounds, soaring in arcs way up in the air, usually three to five at once, then falling in clusters, striking throughout the open area of the park. At first, each time one lands, it sets off a small stampede.
Still, it was becoming something of a carnival. People were dancing, drumming, and clapping, trying to create a festive occupied territory in and out of the tear gas clouds. I pass four women doing a dance with gossamer scarves, all of them wearing gas masks. Others are spinning around without even bandanas, just out of sheer defiance.
The Bunny Guy advances on the wall, arms swinging, with great drama. Gassed, he beats a hasty retreat.
There are activists with hockey sticks systematically thwacking the canisters back at the perimeter, and one guy in a gas mask scoops one up, runs up to the perimeter with a plume of gas billowing behind him, and chucks it back over the wall.
“Don’t do that without gloves,” a medic warns me. “They’re red hot. You can get major burns from doing that.”
“And that doesn’t mean any gloves,” says another. “It’ll burn right through thin leather. You really need a hockey mitt.”
When I find Shawn and Heidi, he excitedly reports that we’ve foiled the cops’ first attempt at a flanking maneuver. They tried to bring up a water cannon—it was basically an armored fire truck—from the northwest, behind the theater, to cut us off. Several Black Bloc affinity groups ran to the scene and disabled it, smashing the windows and attacking the tires until the driver, convinced he was about to be pulled out of the cab, reversed the vehicle and pulled a hasty retreat. No one was hurt, but there were rumors the accompanying squad of police nabbed a few random activists near the scene (not the Black Bloc kids, of course, that would have been too difficult) and took them off with them—possibly the day’s first arrests.
We watch from a distance as another line of cops marching towards the theater ends up getting pelted so heavily they too had to retreat. “The ones in blue,” Heidi points out, “are provincial police. The ones in green are local, city cops. They’re no big deal. It’s the blue guys who are the really scary ones, because they’re brutal and they get all the high-tech gadgetry.”
Someone is claiming they just saw one of the cops near the theater trip, fall down, and thwack the ground repeatedly with his baton in frustration. Another minor victory. Someone hears it, and smiles.
There were all sorts of cameras, everywhere. Many activists are carefully documenting acts of carnivalesque defiance; others are filming the cops. Karen finds us. She says she’s choking on the gas and can’t film any more; she’s heading down to the Green Zone. We say we’ll meet her down there later. Almost as soon as she left, I run into Time’s Up Bill, a bicycle activist from New York. Bill was unmasked, looking grimly indifferent to the gas, but armed with a huge video camera.
He spots me because I have my mask off for a moment.
“Hey, David, are you busy right now? Would you be willing to do a brief interview about Akwesasne?”
“Sure. Well, how brief are we talking about?”
“Just a minute or two.”
I smile. “You want to do it here?”
We stroll up to a spot with relatively clear air, about forty feet from the checkpoint, and I start giving a brief description of the caravan, the fish-fry, the crossing. About halfway through, we both look up and spot three canisters descending in a graceful parabolic arc directly at our heads. We start running, laugh, reposition ourselves a little further from the action, and finish the interview.
It’s turning into a standoff. No one is throwing rocks unless the police try to advance, and for the time being, they’re no longer trying. Instead, they just loft endless tear gas and pepper bombs into the park, as activists along the perimeter either toss them back, or throw anything that might look like a response in kind. It started largely as an exchange of tear gas for smoke bombs, which arc in a similar fashion. They are also completely harmless—a purely symbolic tit-for-tat, but somehow very satisfying. Later, people seemed to be shooting off flares, and I saw colored lights that I think must have been Roman candles, bottle rockets, or something. Further off, the catapult was flinging teddy bears over remaining sections of the wall. It was all purely expressive, almost like a matter of principle that we could give as good as we got.
At first, the landing of a canister in a crowd would create a panicked stampede, despite the people shouting not to run. It would happen especially when the police started using canisters that would burst into flames and start spinning crazily, obviously impossible to throw back. Before long, though, the panic subsided, as it was mainly gas-masked or sturdy people who had the wherewithal to remain. Someone showed me the trick of standing directly in front of a group of panicked, fleeing people with your arms spread out; invariably, they would slow down and then stop. But, before too long, the panicked flights pretty much stopped anyway.
At the north of the park, there’s a little cluster of trees that’s become a kind of observation center for noncombatants. Next to it stand several Mohawk Warriors, including Stacey Boots, who apparently never himself advanced to the wall, but hung back like a proper military leader, giving occasional tactical advice. There are also five or six metalworkers, some Anglophone, some Francophone, unmasked, but carrying bandanas and vinegar just in case. They’re not in action, but literally showing the flag: they’re surrounding a large placard they’ve arranged near a tree with their union colors.
It is around this point that I begin noticing, as I probe the zone near the perimeter, that a lot of the masked figures around me are actually friends. La Resistance emerges from the mist, with a general exchange of hugs. A bit further north is Buffy, entirely in black, with a reinforced bicycle helmet and a round garbage lid as a shield. Behind her are most of the other Prince Edwards Islands kids, similarly dressed. She pulls off her mask briefly to wave. If the PEI group is taking the role of peltasts, light and mobile, Montréal Ya Basta! are the hoplites. About twenty of them are standing in formation nearby—with a shield-wall of thirteen and five or six drummers: also in black, mostly, with black motorcycle helmets, black gas masks, and three-foot black plastic shields, but all covered in strange, foam, rainbow padding, with dinosaur spines down their backs, complex shapes emerging from their helmets, pentagram-like symbols on their shields. The drums were made of plastic water-bottles. It’s visually extraordinary, though, tactically, somewhat pointless. In such a wide open space, a phalanx is about as effective as the original cop line had been: unless you had a line of hundreds, one could be fairly easily outflanked and surrounded. The shields, however, are highly effective against tear gas canisters and plastic bullets (which the police are beginning to use fairly indiscriminately), if useless for holding ground. The Yabbas seem to have found something of a purpose in simply interposing themselves and drawing fire.
This seems to be the emerging division of labor. The Black Bloc, especially the Americans among them, are taking the role of first line of defense. They’re not themselves throwing projectiles, just holding ground—though they’re willing to grab any opportunity to rip down new sections of the fence. Everyone throwing rocks seems to be local; I’m guessing many might be those militant seventeen-year-olds Sebastien had been telling me about, who, unlike the Bloc, never subscribed to principles of nonviolence.
A lot of the action at this point is by the side of the area where the wall first fell: there is a wide street running just below, and another strip of wall as such.
I fall back to the observation post, where the huge Mohawk Warrior I’d shared a rope with earlier seems to have just come back from the fray, apparently for the first time. He’s joyously narrating the story of how the wall first came down. Stacey, ever stoic, allows himself a brief smile. He turns to two masked Black Bloc’ers, offering strategic advice.
“Careful to guard your left flank down there and allow an escape route, because, if they sweep up that street and surround you, it can turn into a ‘kill zone.’ That’s how massacres happen.”
The police strategy, now that earlier attempts to drive a wedge into the park or cut us off have failed, seems to be to simply pump tear gas—and increasingly nasty tear gas, I notice—into the zone surrounding the wall for hours, until our numbers start to thin. Then, presumably, they’ll move out and secure the area for the opening ceremony, scheduled for 5:30. Ultimately, there will be no way to stop them, because they are receiving reinforcements, while our numbers can only dissipate. We’ll never have as many as we did when we first hit the wall. Our aim then becomes to slow them down as much as possible.
Detail of Quebec City indicating the security perimeter (heavy line) and the approximate area of tear gas deployment (thin line, grey area), i) The site of the CLAC/CASA action on Friday April 20th. It was at this intersection that the wall first came down. 2) Site of many of the Rue St. Jean actions. Designated as a green-zone on Friday, it became red when the fence was beached on Saturday. 3) Alternative media center. 4) Site of the GOMM action on Friday and continued confrontation during the days that followed. 5) I’llôt Fleuri, end point of the candle-light march from Laval, beginning of Thursday night’s celebration, home of both the free kitchen and green zone actions. 6) Gathering area and starting point for Saturday’s March. + = medical center. The medical center, sites 3 and 5 were all directly tear gassed by police, despite their green zone designations and distance from the perimeter. (Raphaël Thierrin and Steve Daniels)
The late afternoon turns into a kind of gradual, fighting retreat.
Major exchange of tear gas for smoke bombs.
The park is now under a continuous cloud of tear gas. Different affinity groups have taken positions in it, marked by flags: some red, some black, some multicolored. There’s one very colorful Native American flag with the head of a Warrior in red and yellow on it, which Mac tells me is called the “Flag of Many Nations,” displayed prominently in the middle of the square. People have been using it as a signal to indicate where the police are trying to advance. A moment ago, it helped rally people to drive back a line of cops by chucking bricks—the cops, Mac is careful to point out, were completely armored so it’s not like any of them are likely to get seriously hurt. For the most part, the projectiles simply bounce off their shields. “Still it’s pretty much impossible to maneuver, let alone begin arrests, under a continual rain of bricks, so it does, effectively, drive them back.”
Tear gas is continuously being thrown back near the perimeter. Medics, who at first had been largely at the far end of the park, washing out eyes and treating asthmatics, start moving up to treat burn victims—the cops are increasingly using tear gas launchers like guns, shooting them directly at people’s chests and heads. Over and over, I’m hearing cries of “Medic!” or more often, the French chant: “Sol! Sol! Sol! Soli-dar-i-té!” Whenever someone went down, hit by a canister or plastic bullet, people would gather and start chanting for solidarity. Other activists would come and form a human wall as medic teams ran up—usually three or four to a team, always in white, with giant red crosses all over them—to hustle the victims out of range. Medics had to run fast or the police would start firing at them.
Initial phenomenological notes on the QC actions, written shortly afterwards:
In a major action, there’s absolutely no way to grasp even a fraction of what’s going on. There are a hundred tiny dramas happening at once, later to be given narrative form by participants. At any given time, you are probably seeing tiny pieces of a dozen—someone running off in what seems a random direction, someone standing engrossed, a cluster of people doing something you can’t quite make out in the distance. Major events might be happening twelve feet away—behind a wall, under an escarpment—of which you have absolutely no idea; at least, until much later, when you start to synthesize accounts.
Tear gas creates an utterly hostile urban landscape. That which should be designed for our convenience, parks, streets, one’s own clothing potentially, becomes painful, but it also encourages the endless hugging and bonding, because everyone you do see who isn’t actually firing on you is your friend. Being gassed is a little like being set on fire; or, at least, what one imagines being set on fire might be like. Pepper spray is the same except more so.
Normally one can confront the cops. When one of them does something obviously unjust, you shame them: there are often literally chants of “Shame! Shame! Shame!” “The whole world is watching!” In New York, one popular chant during obvious acts of repression is “Go Fight Crime! Go Fight Crime!” None of this is possible here. Even when, as at A16, a policeman is beating you with a baton as you lie on the ground, you have some idea who is beating you. You can compare him to bullies who used to beat you up in grade school, or to police on TV. These cops are specters, ghosts, mechanical abstractions. It is utterly impossible to see them as individuals. They are only pieces on a board, and the sources of various forms of terror and pain.
Gas masks makes one feel a little like a machine oneself—the hugging and embracing is in part to remind you that you’re not.
More gas—periodic calls of “Medic!”—as people are hit by canisters or plastic bullets, which are now being used more or less indiscriminately. So much for the rules of engagement announced with such fanfare before the Summit. People are running up and lobbing smoke bombs and tear gas canisters directly back at cops.
Whoops arise as one cop trips in retreat. The battle is still very much seesawing back and forth. I see someone being carried off screaming, with serious burns and blood-splattered clothes.
Craig, the huge fellow from the spokescouncil, comes clambering up toward the fence, armed with a big two-by-four he found somewhere, carrying it like a sword, looking immensely pleased with himself. He’s in what can only be described as a black battle suit, wrapped in plastic bags, with a round shield and gas mask perched on his head. About twenty seconds later, two medics run up and ask if they can use the two-by-four for splints—someone’s been incapacitated, needs to be carried away. He sighs, shrugs good naturedly, and hands it over.
We’re starting to take serious casualties.
Kitty, standing some thirty yards from the wall, is hit in the foot by a tear gas canister. A team of medics runs up, removes her boot, confirms that nothing’s broken. Still, it hurts like hell and she’s limping for some time afterwards. Kitty doesn’t have a gas mask, just two or three bandanas drenched in vinegar. A bit in front, Craig is struck in the ribs and doubles over in excruciating pain. Medics ask everyone in the area to form a circle around him for protection as they investigate. At first, we thought he was hit by some kind of dowel or wooden bullet, but it turns out to be yet another tear gas canister, the kind that had been fired up in the air, but in his case, was fired directly at him. Apparently he had broken a couple of ribs in exactly the same spot at A16 a year before—hence the agony. People rush up with water, trying to help. In the end it takes four people to carry him away.
I fall back to check up on the Refugees, who are mostly hanging back for lack of gas masks.
The big question at this point was lines of retreat. Remembering Stacey’s remarks about kill zones, it occurred to me that escape routes were going to be increasingly important. Especially since we’d promised we would try to keep the action out of St. Jean Baptiste, and no one I talked to was quite sure how we’d be able to leave if they tried to cut off René Lévesque again and we couldn’t just fall back the way we came. We all agree this is going to be increasingly important as the Summit’s opening ceremony approaches. They’re obviously not going to be able to hold the ceremony with a major battle going on twenty yards away and tear gas everywhere, the police are beefing up their numbers and, presumably, preparing for a big push, to get us at least within what they consider some reasonable distance. We try to find a clear space to look at maps, but the maps we have are hard to read especially because they give no indication of gradients, so we have no idea if what looks like an open space is actually a cliff.
The Barricada collective, from Boston, seems have occupied the north end of the park. There’s a single masked figure, entirely in black, standing on the base of an empty fountain near some large colonial buildings that mark the north edge, looking not unlike a sable peacock as he scans the action below. I pull up my mask and ask him: “Do those streets go through behind here?”
“I don’t know. Why?”
“I’m just worried we’ll get cut off if they move into this side of the park.”
“Why don’t you check?”
I spend some time investigating. There are indeed cliffs, at some points, or at least very precipitous stretches with boulders (this was also one of the few areas still covered with dirty snow), but also stairs and several streets that look wide enough it’s hard to imagine anyone closing them off. Even the cliffs look climbable. So, it looks like there won’t be a problem.
Loud explosions ring out as new, even nastier tear gas is employed. There has been a persistent rumor, too, that the police were going to be bringing in attack dogs. Briefly, I actually do see one, a German shepherd on a leash, on a ledge occupied by police far off in the distance. It’s the only one I see.
“Not surprising they’re not using the dogs,” someone remarks. “If they let a dog out in all this for more than a few minutes, it would probably strangle on the gas.”
Someone else sighs philosophically. “You know I quit smoking a year ago. Now one day is probably going to do all the damage ten years of smoking probably would have.”
“That’s what we get for trying to fight pollution.”
Mac is heading down the hill to meet Lesley and some friends for a coffee break on the Côte d’Abraham to our north, on the edge of the Green Zone. He assures me cafes are indeed open there. Would I like to come along? I find most of the rest of the Refugees, who decide it wouldn’t hurt to take a little while to clear our lungs.
In fact, the Côte d’Abraham is nothing like the shuttered expanses of René Lévesque (which was, after all, as we’d been warned, “the street of the bourgeosie”). Here everything is open: shops, restaurants, at least a dozen streetside cafes. Protesters mill about in clumps. Some have their gas masks pulled back like medieval helmets, most have bandanas wrapped around their necks and jangling action gear of one sort or another: backpacks, goggles, water bottles, ropes and grapples, binoculars, or silly masks and street theater props taped around their backs for safekeeping. It was hard to see them as anything but a random crowd or, at best, meandering bands, but underneath, one knew there was a whole invisible architecture of organization—collectives, clusters, blocs, affinity groups. I try to envision what it would look like if somehow, all the organization could somehow be made visible: streets suddenly lighting up with a hundred colored lines, circles, diagrams.
There’s a dramatic, strikingly beautiful church at the very foot of a steep cobbled street. In front of it is Lesley, talking to someone from MacLean’s, one of the more popular Canadian magazines.
“Hey, David,” she asks, “you want to talk to a reporter?”
“Uh, sure.”
The woman is in her early thirties, wearing a tasseled jacket and carrying a pad. She is cheerful, enthusiastic, even perky. I feel like I’m dealing with a visitor from another world.
“David Graeber? Isn’t your father or something a professor at Yale? He’s an anarchist of some sort, right? I was reading about him in a recent issue of the Montréal Gazette.”
“No, that’s me, I’m a professor at Yale.”
“Would you mind if I ask you some questions?”
“Um, no. I mean, yes, sure. I don’t mind. Go ahead.”
“Well, a recent survey showed that a majority of Canadian citizens are actually in favor of free trade. For me, that raises a lot of questions about how much you can really claim to be representing ‘the public’ in protests like this.”
I have absolutely no idea what she’s talking about: what sort of survey, how the question was framed, what responses to other questions might have been. Even thinking about it makes my brain hurt. I consider raising the issue of what the word “free trade” is supposed to mean anyway, how it’s a loaded term, how even I would hesitate if someone asked me if I was against free trade. But that’s more complicated than I’m really capable of expressing at that moment. Instead, I try to make a case that the fact that the government is intentionally trying to keep the contents of the treaty a secret shows that they don’t believe the public would accept it if they had any idea what it actually entailed. At least, that’s what I was trying to say. I walk away with the distinct impression I had just come off like a blithering idiot. It also strikes me that at least now I understand why it is that anti-globalization protesters interviewed on television almost invariably look like blithering idiots. I’m normally a pretty articulate guy. In fact, one could say that, as a professor, being able to sound intelligent—even, to provide glib responses to unexpected questions—is kind of what I do for a living. If I can’t put together a coherent sentence on no sleep, coming out of two hours of chemical warfare, how on earth do they expect anyone else to?
Mac and Lesley have vanished again. The rest of us end up sipping cappuccino in a tiny restaurant in which even the waiters have bandanas still tied around their necks. The owner is handing out free bottles of water to anyone who looks like they’re back from the front, and activists are continually filing in and out of the bathroom to wash out kerchiefs, eyes, and faces.
“Careful,” the owner says, periodically, in French. “Remember, if you get the clothes wet, the tear gas will come out again. Remember, it’s also in your hair…”
There’s one question on everyone’s mind. Somebody’s got to ask it.
“So,” I say, “what happened? How did we win? I mean—so fast. Last month at the consulta, we were all assuming that we’d have to fight our way through thousands of cops to even be able to get to the wall.”
The general feeling is that we hadn’t been doing the math right. “After all,” Heidi reflected, “when they say there’s going to be ‘three thousand cops,’ that doesn’t mean they’re all going to be on duty at the same time. Even if they’re on triple overtime, only maybe half of them are going to be on duty at any given moment. Plus, they have to maintain a strategic reserve. So you have maybe one thousand cops to defend a seven kilometer perimeter, along with doing everything else they normally need cops to do.”
“Whereas our forces were all concentrated on one point.”
The big news on the street is that Jaggi has already been arrested—inevitably enough. Someone at the next table has all the details. Apparently, he had never gone near the wall, but turned off with the Green march. An hour ago, he was hobnobbing with some other organizers on the Côte d’Abraham when several plainclothesmen dressed as protesters nabbed him from behind. His friends—including, apparently, several women who’d been co-facilitators at the spokescouncil—tried to intervene and almost succeeded in pulling him back, whereupon they pulled out truncheons and identified themselves as police. Then they roughed him up and threw him into the back of a black SUV. It drove off and that was the last anyone had seen of him.
“Any news from the GOMM Green march?” we ask our new friends at the next table.
Someone grins. “The story I heard is they all sat down in front of the wall near the highway, flashing peace symbols. Of course, the police started gassing them, just like everybody else. Someone started up tossing the tear gas back and, before long, they’d ripped down their part of the wall, too.” “They went Red?”
“Spontaneously.”
“Wait a minute,” says a middle-aged woman with horn-rimmed glasses at another table. “I heard about lobbing back tear gas. But I’m pretty sure they didn’t attack the wall over by the highway. Anyway, I was passing by less than an hour ago and the fence was still up down there.”
“I was there when it happened,” says someone else. “What happened was—yeah, someone started kicking back the tear gas. But, almost as soon as they started doing it, some leader type with a megaphone showed up and announced that they’d made their point, and that the action was over, and they all retreated to the Green Zone.”
By the time the Refugees head back towards the wall, all the traffic seems to be going in the other direction. Perhaps seven people are drifting downhill and away for every one moving back up. We pass the dragonfly drummers, in a little circle in the middle of the street. They’re trying to rally people, but not too effectively. When we get to the top the reason becomes obvious: phalanxes of police occupy the middle of the park, and smaller squadrons are systematically taking up positions on each approach street, choking off access, then gassing like crazy everyone in sight. Lines of riot police are moving forward systematically, ten or twenty meters at a time. Eventually, they start moving down the three main north-south streets—Turnbull, Claire-Fontaine, and Sainte-Claire—that lead down the hill into St. Jean Baptiste.
It doesn’t seem they are trying to do mass arrests. At least not yet. They’re just trying to clear the area.
The Flag of Many Nations and a few black anarchist flags are by now at the bottom of the hill, along St. Jean, and the only possible game left was to delay the police advance. Where the Black Bloc is is anybody’s guess. Same with the Red Bloc: nobody in this crowd was even thinking about throwing rocks. It had become a matter of sitting in the streets, singing songs, and waiting to be assaulted. Simple stubborn civil disobedience.
There are about ten to twenty Darth Vaders occupying the heights at the top of the street, looming out of an anxious mist of their own creation, preparing to descend on us. Gradually a group of us assemble along Lockwell Street, and decide to march up to oppose them. We wade up through the mist—partly led by me, since I’m one of the few with a gas mask—and sit down on a stretch of street, with Shawn and Lyn following behind with minidisks to make sure every sound is recorded. A young woman carrying a bullhorn asks if anyone has a copy of the “Charter of Rights and Freedoms” from the Canadian constitution (legal observers had been handing them out before the action).
“I think I have one in my bag somewhere,” says Shawn. Lyn also produces a copy.
We sit on the cobblestones, about thirty or forty of us. I take off my gas mask. We are, I notice, in the middle of a purely residential neighborhood. The woman with the bullhorn, wearing a suede jacket and no sort of gear whatsoever, unfolds the paper and begins a dramatic recitation of the section concerning freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. An IMC radio journalist holds out her microphone right next to the woman, kneeling, one arm dramatically upraised. Behind us, I notice a couple of video cameras focused on the police.
We knew, of course, they’d gas us.
Only twenty or third yards from the police position, for the first time, in fact, we could actually look into their eyes and see their faces. Most of them weren’t wearing gas masks—probably because they knew they’d be firing at a distance, and downhill. We all stared transfixed as one woman cop, with a simple inoffensive face and blonde hair pulled back severely behind her visor, pulled out her launcher and began to take aim.
People started calling out to her: “Don’t do it! Please! Don’t gas us!”
“This is a nonviolent assembly!”
“We’re not your enemies. Please, don’t shoot!”
Then she fired. The canister sailed a few inches past the upheld microphone and exploded directly behind us.
Within a matter of seconds, it was a barrage. Eight, nine, ten cans were spinning all around us, exploding in flames, scattering everywhere. We scattered too. The young woman with the megaphone started walking slowly, defiantly backwards—then, turned over her shoulder and picked up the bullhorn one last time. “I just want to point out that you just broke the law!”
Another tear gas can landed about a foot away from her, then spun, flames shooting out of it. Another smacked into someone’s window right above us, where for all we know some family had just been sitting down to dinner. The entire area turned into a cloud of CS.
That was, as Shawn pointed out, the first use of tear gas we’d seen in an obviously residential neighborhood.
Before long, we’re back on the Côte, where the Flag of Many Nations waves. Someone tells us that, while on Turnbull the police were distracting themselves by gassing pacifists and local residents, on a nearby side street—Burton, or maybe Claire-Fontaine—a couple Black Bloc affinity groups had moved up, thinking to do some kind of flanking maneuver, and discovered three empty black SUVs completely unguarded. These were the vehicles used by snatch squads, quite possibly the very ones earlier used to nab Jaggi. They smashed the windows and made away with scores of plastic shields and other supplies, including several documents on cop formation tactics.
Shawn and Lyn, still sputtering from the gas, head off to find their car, which they think they left somewhere in walking distance the night before. We’re all going to be meeting in an hour or two anyway, back in Laval.
By this time there’s a strong feeling that things are winding down. We hear the opening ceremony has been delayed until 10PM (this turns out to be untrue: it actually began ten minutes later, at 7:30, but nonetheless hours behind schedule).
Another gas attack: this one quite close to us. Flaming canisters come spinning all the way down to where we are gathered on St. Jean, on a little intersection near a deserted lot. People come streaming down the same street. Some of the Refugees go out and spread our arms to prevent a stampede, but there’s no use trying to hold the position. One young man with a red flag tries advancing, nearly alone. Before long, he has to retreat again. Another guy with a Québec Soviet flag (!)—half fleur de lis, half hammer and sickle—plants it next to the Flag of Many Nations. Some CLAC fellow with a megaphone is trying to rally everyone in the vicinity in French. A small group drags a dumpster to the middle of the intersection and sets a fire in it. It’s a flat space and well ventilated, just above another steep slope; seems as good a place as any to try to make a stand. I notice, too, that several of the people milling around the dumpster do not look like activists, but appear to be local residents, pissed off about the tear gas. And they definitely don’t seem to be blaming us. One of the CLAC people is explaining to them that a fire will burn away the residual tear gas.
After a while, another CLAC person—a tall fellow with long, brown, shaggy hair—turns to me. He remembers me from the consulta.
“We are going to Laval: there is a spokescouncil,” he says. “Would you like to come?”
“Oh, yeah. Actually that’s where I’m supposed to meet the rest of my affinity group in a few minutes. How are you getting there?”
“There’s a bus.”
I head off with the CLAC team, one man and two women, but before we get there, they decide to stop first for a beer. Would I like to come along? I consider it, it occurs to me that I’m completely exhausted. So they direct me to the bus stop, and after a pleasant chat with a friendly LA Times reporter in the next seat, I arrive in Laval.
The room, which has every sort of banner draped all over the walls, contains maybe two hundred people, but only half, at best, are taking part in the meeting. I soon see why. The conversation has degenerated into yet another argument about diversity of tactics. There are people complaining bitterly about rock-throwing, others insisting it was the only way to deal with indiscriminate attacks by the police. Nobody seems to be listening to anybody else, or talking about plans for the next day (or maybe that’s later? I don’t see an agenda on the wall). The whole spokescouncil just seems to be a chance for people to sound off.
Most of the Refugees are already in the room, or nearby, lounging about, playing with their minidisks, and watching images of the action from other peoples’ video cameras. I check in and we all agree to head back to the house in an hour and a half.
It was at this moment I also discover that I am no longer the only member of NYC Ya Basta! in Québec City. Laura, the Italian woman and CUNY grad student, had just arrived with a carload of Yabbas—that is, Yabbas of the genuine, Italian variety: Beppe, Sandra, and Roberto. Laura starts laughing the moment she sees me. She runs up to give me a prolonged embrace. “Ha! This is so perfect! So wonderful! All the big pragmatic men of action in Ya Basta!—not a single one got through. They all gave up. And who actually makes it into action? Just you and me. The two intellectuals!”
Her friends are dressed to the nines in gorgeous Italian suits. “It was the only way we could get through,” Roberto explains to me cheerfully.
“Yes,” Laura said. “When we tried to drive through customs, the man asked where we were going. We said Québec City. Then he asked the purpose of our trip and Beppe said “tourism.” So he started going through Beppe’s passport, looking at the stamps. ‘Hmmm…Geneva, June 1999; Seattle, November 1999; Prague, September 2000. So you just happened to show up at every major protest at a globalization summit for the last three years? I don’t think so.’”
“So, what did you do?”
“They all just started screaming at him: ‘WE ARE ITALIAN CITIZENS TRYING TO VISIT CANADA! HOW DARE YOU? WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE? I WILL NOT STAND TO BE TREATED LIKE THIS! WHO IS YOUR COMMANDING OFFICER? WHAT IS YOUR BADGE NUMBER? WE’RE GOING TO CALL THE ITALIAN CONSULATE AND LODGE AN OFFICIAL COMPLAINT! WE’RE GOING TO MAKE THIS AN INTERNATIONAL FUCKING INCIDENT!’ And, finally, he just backed down.”
“You mean that actually worked?”
“The suits helped.”
The one thing that really worries me is that no one has heard anything from Karen. I was pretty sure we’d explained to her the importance of making sure other members of your affinity group know your whereabouts—or at least of getting word to them before you simply leave town. Anyway, it seemed like basic common sense. I find a place to check my email. Nothing. My cell phone is dead, all my numbers thus inaccessible (for instance, Sasha’s), but I borrow a phone from which I can check my messages. Nothing. The obvious implication is that she’s been arrested, which is both possible (I am told they have been targeting independent journalists) and disturbing (since she has no idea what she’s doing). I’m trying to remember: did we even make sure she wrote the legal number on her arm? Yes. We did that at the IMC. I borrow the cell phone again and call Legal. All I get are busy signals. I call the IMC. No information.
Finally, I give up. The Italians have a car, and invite me to join them on a brief spin to scout out the action. We end up taking a tour of the Upper City, passing down René Lévesque and the Fields of Abraham, watching occasional night battles—at one point I was pretty sure I saw someone throw a molotov, off in the distance. Somehow, after about ten minutes, all of us were singing:
Riot riot–I wanna riot
Riot riot–a riot of my own
(We had all, without noticing, dropped the “white” part.) I think I actually started it. Which is uncharacteristic, since I can’t sing a note. Not that it matters much with the Clash.
“Ah,” sighs Roberto, whose English is not fluent. “Even when we can hardly speak to each other, we all know the same songs.”
We arrived at the house around midnight, only to discover Janna, of all people, already there. It turns out she’s a friend of Lyn’s.
One result of Janna’s medical ordeal is that she had become something of an expert on the effects of “non-lethal” chemical weapons. Clothing, she explained to us, absorbs toxins. It’s important to wash out everything we’re wearing very carefully before we take a shower or else the next time we get wet, it’ll be just as bad as when we were gassed the first time. My clothes were clearly saturated with all sorts of toxins. On the other hand, I had no bags and, therefore, nothing to change into. I ended up wandering around the house naked at 2AM while everyone else was asleep, doing laundry in a machine in the half-finished basement. My sweaters weren’t washable, but, fortunately, most of them could be left behind since, according to all reports, Sunday was going to be even warmer than the day before.
Then I caught a good six or seven hours sleep—a rare luxury for a day of action.
For breakfast the next morning, Heidi had fetched croissants, pain au chocolate , and a copy of every local paper available. She’d also found several foreign ones. We passed them around while watching TV newscasters endlessly replay the high points of Friday’s marches and confrontations. The coverage was amazing for its detail. There were the sort of headlines American media activists dream about, the kind you would never see in the US in a million years: “THE WALL FALLS!” “THE TEARS OF DEMOCRACY,” (the latter referring to people’s reactions to the tear gas), and so on.
Information available to us was a confusing mix of rumors, news reports, rumors reported in news reports, and official police statements—pretty much all of which could be assumed to be substantially untrue. At the bakery, Heidi had heard that a group of eighty nuns, enraged by the gas, was preparing to march on the main checkpoint to rip down the wall. The TV was reporting only fifty arrests on Friday, but Ben and Lyn, who had been on the phone with someone at the IMC, heard much higher numbers: including 126 in a sweep just a few hours before (both numbers turned out to be wildly inaccurate). The police had thrown a press conference Friday evening, announcing that a special operation had nabbed “the leader of the Black Bloc”—obviously meaning Jaggi. Jaggi’s current whereabouts were unknown. (Only several days later did police acknowledge holding him; he was officially charged with “illegal possession of a catapult.”)
Even the American press was far better than usual:
Protesters Seize Day in Québec Trade Foes Tear Gassed at Summit of Americas
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, April 21, 2001; Page A01
QUÉBEC CITY, April 20—President Bush and 33 other Western Hemisphere leaders seeking to build the world’s largest free-trade zone opened a summit meeting today as clouds of tear gas and violent demonstrations played havoc with schedules and delayed meetings.
Bush remained holed up in his hotel as the summit’s opening ceremonies were delayed more than an hour. He was forced to cancel one meeting and postpone or abbreviate others because the movements of heads of state around Québec City were hampered by the anti-globalization protests.
“If they are protesting because of free trade, I’d say I disagree,” Bush said. “I think trade is very important to this hemisphere. Trade not only helps spread prosperity but trade helps spread freedom.”
In the lobby of the Loews Hotel, confusion reigned, as Bush aides scrambled to keep track of the changing schedule while watching the riots on television. Colombian President Andres Pastrana waited out the delays in the cocktail lounge…
There were rumors of huge numbers already assembling: twenty-five thousand at the Vieux Port, at the very foot of the city, to begin the labor march and People’s Summit; a student group massing on the Plains of Abraham; huge numbers at Laval. Everyone, including the newspapers, were going on about the sheer size of the event: there’s simply no way the police can handle this. The big wild card, we agree, will be the labor march. The organizers, predictably, have set it up so that everyone starts ten or fifteen blocks from the perimeter and then marches off in the other direction, to end up in a rally in some distant lot. The question is whether rank and file will be satisfied by this. We know that both CLAC and NEFAC (Northeastern Federation of Anarcho-Communists, a labor-oriented anarchist group) will have people there, trying to divert people to the wall.
Comparing notes, we also try to piece together more of a picture of what must have happened yesterday. Akwesasne we decide we’ll never figure out, not until we have more information. Obviously, something fucked up in a big way. Shawn wants to know: why the hell were you guys four hours late? Half the Warriors had left already. I honestly can’t tell him. And what was this idiocy of “all or nothing”? The irony about Friday was that, while we were all at Akwesasne eating fish, CLAC people at the spokescouncil were in a near panic that the Carnival Against Capitalism would be a bust. The torchlight parade and women’s action were beautiful, but relatively small. No one had any idea how many people would show up Saturday. That’s why there had been so much jubilation about numbers Saturday morning.
Janna comes in late, sniffling, in a nightgown—she, at least, got through with all her baggage. She says she’d spent most of Friday in the Green Zone, whose center was below the highway at the foot of the hill, and had caught a glimpse of the Living River.
“Oh, right, the Blue Bloc! I was wondering if those guys even got through.”
“They were there all right, a couple hundred of them, actually. I saw them on St. Jean, not long after we heard the wall came down. They had this whole complex organization with four flags each representing one of the four elements—green for earth, blue for water, red for fire and… was it white for air? No, I think it was yellow. Starhawk was there with a little drum and they put on a spiral dance and called on the power of the river to put the elements on our side.”
Sam is looking dubious, as if trying not to mutter something cynical into his coffee.
“Well,” I remark, “for what it’s worth, we did have remarkably good weather yesterday.”
“Yeah, the breeze was at our backs the whole time,” said Lyn. “You saw how it kept blowing all the tear gas back on the police? Especially at first, when they were firing right in front of them, it all just streamed right back into their faces.”
“The earth is on our side,” said Janna. “I really believe that.”
“Maybe we should make a sign to carry to the park,” I say: “‘We Know Which Way the Wind Is Blowing.’”
Still worried about Karen, I end up wasting the rest of the morning and early afternoon on some scheme planned by Heidi and her friend, a Frontline producer named Claudia, to visit the local prison, in a forest some miles out of town. Claudia has a car. There are already a handful of activists doing jail solidarity in front on the prison, but they have only a limited list of who’s inside, and no one has heard word of any IMC or other freelance videographers being held there.
Later, that handful is to expand to a veritable “Solidarity Village,” as people pitch tents, bring in jugglers and musicians, and create a continual rhythm of chants and music to ensure the prisoners know they’re out there. A squad of riot cops will appear, and entertainers with megaphones will tell jokes and try to crack them up. There will be vegetarian cookouts and an endless supply of journalists. Not now. Only about twenty people who have reason to believe members of their affinity groups or close relatives are behind bars, a couple legal reps, and one rather pathetic middle-aged couple worried sick about their sixteen-year-old daughter.
Everything takes longer than it ought to. Finally, after a marathon cell phone session, Claudia says she wants to catch the tail end of the People’s Summit—which the organizers had intentionally placed far, far from the action, near the port several kilometers away. The parade was supposed to set out at noon, marching to the summit; we’ve definitely missed that. Anyway, I’m reluctant to head that far from the city without knowing how I’m going to get back. She offers to drop us both off at the IMC, where Heidi has to do a radio show. We agree to meet with the rest of our group at the party under the highway in the Green Zone that evening, and I head up toward the park to see if I can find La Resistance.
There’s graffiti everywhere: a thousand Circle-As, “FUCK THE COPS,” “NO CHOICE,” “MURS BLANCS, PEUPLE MUET,” gas masks painted onto the faces of every half-dressed model on a bus-stop advertisement, not a billboard anywhere left unaltered or undefaced. By the side of the highway, at various spots:
QUI EST LE CHEF DU BLACK BLOC?
THE GATES OF HEAVEN WILL BE TAKEN BY STORM
Y’EN A PAS EPAIS
PROPERTY IS THEFT
At the café, it’s still all activists. Within five minutes, I have most of the story of the day. The parade was enormous: the news is saying sixty-thousand people, with an endless display of puppets, banners, floats, and theatrical performances. It ended in a rally with speeches by Jose Bové, Maude Barlow, and all sorts of international celebrities. “Did anyone break off to go to the wall?” Well, not in the thousands, no, but there have been a lot of trade unionists who at least have visited the perimeter. One column of several hundred auto workers formed affinity groups and marched up to a gate somewhere way on the east side of the perimeter, and ended up getting seriously gassed. Many are still there, thinks the fellow at the next table. At any rate, things will really get interesting, he thinks, when the rally breaks up, because a lot of the participants are saying they’re going to go to the party underneath the highway.
“That’s the Green Zone, right? The Ile Flueriot?” I ask, looking at my map.
“Yes, there. Boulevard Charest Est. You see, there’s this huge intersection of six different roads? It’s not far from the IMC.” A few minutes later, I’ve resumed my climb towards the Old City. The cops have been gassing all day. There is, literally, a thick cloud of the stuff, hanging like a noxious wall over St. Jean Baptiste, and extending well below it. One thing is a pleasant change, though: by now the loyalties of the surrounding community have become utterly explicit. It was as if, Friday, they were still observing, measuring, waiting to see whether the anarchists would really trash the city, as the federal authorities had been promising them, whether the cops would really gas them, as the anarchists had said they would. By now, they knew. We had hurt no one and damaged nothing. We had done our best to avoid making a battlefield of their neighborhoods. The police had responded by gassing and attacking everyone indiscriminately, firing toxins directly into their patios and gardens.
By Saturday afternoon, half the houses are hanging out some sort of banner or sign: “We are with you!,” “No FTAA!,” or even, once, “We support the Black Bloc” (except, of course, in French). Many have also brought garden hoses out to their stoops or are dangling them from windows to provide free water for protesters. Grandmas wave and smile from porches. Children giggle and follow us around. It’s like some crazy anarchist fantasy. The one exception, as I pass, is a stocky, middle-aged man who is throwing some kind of tantrum at a handful of Black Bloc kids in front of his building, right at the end of the steep street leading to the park. “Why are you still here?” he’s shouting, “I understand yesterday, you tore down the wall, you made your statement. That’s good, I support you. But enough now! Still you have to fight the cops, still they’re gassing, my home is full of tear gas, for two days it has been full of gas, I’ve had to send my infant son away to an aunt in the suburbs because he was choking on it. My mother has had to abandon her apartment. Enough! Right now there is a labor march in the Lower City, it says on TV there are 60,000 people marching. Why aren’t you marching with them? Why are you still here bringing the gas on us?” The Black Bloc kids seem flustered; they appear to know enough French to understand him, but not enough to make any kind of articulate reply. Finally, three or four neighbors gather and try to calm him down. “It’s not their fault, they just want to make sure the heads of state hear their message.” “You can’t expect them all to march away from where the delegates are actually meeting.” “It’s not the kids who are gassing us,” one woman insists, “it’s the police.”
The park is ours again, with scattered collections of people in the square sitting on the ground, putting on performances. Gas explosions are periodic, but nowhere near the same intensity as the day before (they’re landing approximately once every three minutes now, says someone with a pocket watch).
The Black Bloc is not in evidence. I’m told they’ve been scattered in small groups for most of the day, going against exposed sectors of the perimeter. I’m disappointed, though, to see that the section of the wall we’d pulled down yesterday was up again. There’s a new, somewhat jerry-built gate. Right behind it, they’ve positioned a water cannon—actually a pretty clever move, since this means we can’t get near enough to trash the thing. The water cannon seems to be set to autopilot, shooting an huge plume of water which slowly swept back and forth across an arc of space in front of it. It is as if they had found a lawn sprinkler that worked at a thousand times the pressure and volume. As a defensive weapon, it was quite effective. A coordinated assault on that section of wall would now clearly be impossible. On the other hand, the presence of plumes of water—no matter how high intensity—on a hot day is apparently just too much of a temptation in the middle of an anti-capitalist carnival. People keep dashing up and making a spectacle of themselves splashing about in the water. Some get knocked off their feet and slide about merrily. Others lean into it and stay up—looking like street mimes walking against the wind—or otherwise clown around. Everyone seems to be enjoying the show; anyway, the cops don’t seem to be firing at anyone. Despite repeated warnings about getting my toxin-drenched clothing wet, I can’t help myself.
I take a brief dip. It’s kind of refreshing.
Back in the park, people are playing Frisbee, bouncing beachballs. Half the time I have my mask pulled up on top of my head.
Old friends are everywhere. At one point Janna appears, entirely wrapped in an elaborate protective outfit made of plastic garbage bags, goggles, poncho, and high plastic boots, carrying a large bag of medical materials for the treatment of the effects of tear gas. She sets up shop by a tree at the very edge of a huge toxic cloud.
“Jesus, Janna! What are you doing here?” asks one of her fellow Refugees.
“I just couldn’t sit back and do nothing while people are being gassed.”
“Are you crazy? I’ve heard they’re using CS again. Who knows what would happen if you were exposed again!”
“CS? Is that really true?” Several bystanders confirm the rumor. The matter becomes a spontaneous group discussion. Eventually, Janna agrees to move back down to St. Jean and set up shop there instead. Two of the bystanders accompany her.
Eventually, I notice scattered clusters of Black Bloc anarchists coalescing on the far edge of the park. Looks like some kind of pre-arranged convergence. At that moment, I had been talking with some friends about the feasibility of a flanking maneuver of our own against the southern portion of the wall, which seemed undefended. Scouting out the territory, I run into Dean, who had been lying on a long flat rock in a rather dashing trenchcoat. I explain my project.
“Count me in,” he smiles, producing an enormous pair of wire clippers from under his coat.
But the spot turns out to be better defended than it appeared. Tear gas canisters land directly at our feet, and five robocops appear with what look like giant shotguns, either for the firing of plastic bullets or pepper-soaked beanbags. We don’t really want to find out, and quickly back away.
By this time, though, the Bloc, still only about forty people, is masking up and about to move out. La Resistance is not among them, but I do spot two friends from yesterday, who suggest I come along. We can always do lookout, they say. Anyway, apparently, there’s a plan. I zip up my hoodie, rendering myself entirely dressed in black, mask myself, and follow.
What follows is one of only three major instances of targeted property destruction during the Summit. The target is the local headquarters of one of Canada’s major banks, the CIBC—one of the main forces lobbying for passage of the FTAA, along with profiting from government student loan programs while pushing for massive cuts in health and education funding.
The bank offices are only a couple blocks from the park, on the edge of a residential neighborhood. There’s some kind of confrontation between pacifists and a line of riot cops a couple blocks away, but I can’t really make out what’s going on there. We find the bank itself, on the first floor of some minor office building, already under siege. However, matters are also a bit more complicated than we anticipated. Two members of the affinity group that planned the action have picked up a police barricade and are preparing to smash in the bank’s plate-glass windows. Standing in their way, though, are two fiftyish hippies, apparently a married couple in identical rainbow jackets and tie-dyed clothes. The two are methodically trying to interpose themselves. Eventually, the woman gives up but her husband is persistent. Spry, dancer-like, he keeps leaping in front of their trajectory every time they pull back to swing. The two kids with the barricade are determined not to hurt him, but neither are they about to give up. There follows a peculiar ballet of feints and thrusts, until the Black Bloc kids figure out a system: one bluffs him, and the other swings hard in a different direction. Before long there’s shattered glass all over the sidewalk.
We’re scouting for cameras or police, and seeing neither. There are a couple of bystanders who are probably reporters, but they’re only carrying notebooks; the police line two blocks away seems oblivious, or maybe they just haven’t received orders yet to move. What there are is extremely disruptive pacifists, who seem to have gone through some SalAMI “de-escalation training” and are trying out all their techniques. As we walk along the edge of the scene, one bearded pacifist, looking rather like the lumberjack fellow from the Spokescouncil (but no, it’s not him) is following us along repeating over and over again, in exactly the same words: “These are not the right tactics to use. These are not the right tactics to use. These are not the right tactics to use.”
I’m considering asking him if he considers this a form of argument. My companions tell me just leave him be. Which seems wise.
A little further off, things look they might be about to descend into shoving matches or actual scuffles.
It’s time for some de-escalation of our own. The Bloc march off, led by a tall blonde guy singing “Kumbaya.”
Except for one small team, one of whom stays behind to spray-paint:
Banks don’t bleed. Protesters have.
Another pastes up a cardboard sign prepared for the occasion:
I Owe You One for the Broken Window
And a third splashes the interior with a bucket of white paint.
We march west, away from the park, but before we’ve gone more than a block or two, we are met by a delegation of middle-aged townsfolk (I think to myself, “I am tempted to call them ‘burghers,’ except that none of them are fat”). They ask us not to go into their neighborhood. It is residential.
One of the anarchists in front is trying to explain that they have nothing to fear from us: we never attack small businesses or personal property. Only corporate establishments.
“Well, there are none of those in this direction. Just people’s homes. So there’s no need to go here.”
After a bit of uncomfortable shifting back and forth, the man next to him is more direct: “Don’t destroy the town,” he says, pointing back to the park. “Go fight the cops!”
“Yes, fight the cops,” says someone else. “We realize you are fighting on our side. We support you. But people are afraid for their neighborhoods.”
For many of the Black Bloc, this must be a moment of ultimate moral confusion. After all, most anarchists believe targeted property destruction is legitimate because it’s not really a form of violence. You can’t be violent to an inanimate object. Because nobody actually gets hurt. This is why the rainbow fellow could act the way he did: he knew none of us would be willing to harm another human being—or anyway, certainly not one that wasn’t directly attacking us, whereas if he had tried to interpose his body like that against a cop, the cop would simply hit him. Suddenly we were faced with members of the public urging us to forgo property destruction, and instead engage in violence. With the pacifists, we could argue, even scream at each other, but we were screaming in the same language. Here we were dealing with a completely different moral universe.
After brief exchange, we turn around and march back towards the park, to the usual loud cheers and applause. Someone shouts: “It’s the People’s Riot Police!”
The park is all celebration: “We won! Summit closed for tear gas!”
Not true, of course.
After a bit I finally find La Resistance, to a general exchange of hugs. I tell Kitty about the bank. She tells me that all day there have been running battles along the north side of the wall, where it cuts through Jean Baptiste. Police lines are so thinly stretched, it’s usually possible to find a spot that’s undefended. Mostly they’ve been using hooks and ropes and clippers like on Friday, but sometimes you can take advantage of abrupt slopes to roll flaming dumpsters or even just shopping carts into the fence.
The Refugees are nowhere to be seen, so I figure I’m La Resistance for the rest of the afternoon. Before long, we end up on the edge of an ancient church graveyard, where the fence has been particularly heavily festooned with signs and slogans, yanking away with grappling hooks, using paving stones to mash away at the main posts, or to chuck over the fence at police vehicles or even, on one or two occasions, individual police. Much of the wall is already down in this area. Every trash bin seems to have a fire in it—to burn away the tear gas—which means as we march we find ourselves moving through alternating streams of smoke, toxic white, and acrid grey.
Kitty explains they’ve been paying particular attention to the churchyard because it’s directly behind the Congress Center where the Summit is taking place.
The Black Bloc was never large that day, rarely more than thirty or forty people, actually, though it would occasionally reconverge at fifty or sixty. People would get scattered, affinity groups of normally six or eight get reduced to two or three people, due to injuries or exhaustion. Though, occasionally, we’d also get reinforcements from people who just arrived in town: like the three Connecticut Yabbas who showed up Saturday morning and joined La Resistance. Just about everyone had been hit by something at some point—often feet or ankles, mostly by tear gas canisters. But plastic bullets were being used increasingly, and from guns with laser sights so at night people could often see that the cops were intentionally aiming for heads or groins. “I got hit in the groin. But I was wearing a cup!” declared one of our new arrivals, triumphantly.
When a scout spotted a plausible target, we’d gather everyone available and form a circle to discuss it. This always involved first getting a couple volunteers to do a camera-check, circling through the surrounding crowds, since there always was one, asking anyone with video cameras or photographic equipment not to take pictures of the meeting. This despite everyone being masked all the time anyway. (Brad told me it was just the same in Prague. The trick is to approach looking vaguely scary, all in black, masked and usually helmeted; and then be scrupulously polite and gracious when you actually open your mouth. The combination proved remarkably effective.) Discussion was pretty free-form, but consensus-based. Then we’d move into action—often greeted by cheers by demonstrators and increasingly, townspeople, whenever we show up in a new place.
The Bloc had only minimal communications—at one point I think our entire comms system consisted of two guys connected via Nextel, whose job was to coordinate so as to make sure we didn’t get cut off and surrounded by cops. When we charged—as on St. Jean—one person also hung back to scout. But that was it. This seemed typical of the whole action, though: if CLAC had a comms or scouting system, which presumably they must have, I never saw a sign of it. It must have been very small. Time’s Up Bill, who spent some time circling the perimeter on a bicycle, later complained that he’d seen numerous unguarded breaches in the security fence all day. If there had been any sort of proper organization, people would have been able to burst right in. But of course most of us had long since decided we didn’t want to invade the perimeter.
In part, too, the attacks on the wall are meant to keep the police off balance, to try to keep them from amassing forces and invading the surrounding neighborhood again.
Not far away from the cemetery, at Rue St. Genevieve, was a huge press of people, a kind of focus of intensity, where the Bloc had earlier been attacking a section of the wall. Apparently, they’d set fire to a dumpster, and rolled it into the fence. It crashed through and flipped over inside the perimeter. Cops then tried to block the breach with a bulldozer, but the Bloc had managed to disable it—by the time we saw it, it looked thoroughly trashed, with revolutionary slogans spray-painted all over it—and escaped just as a squad of maybe thirty riot cops marched up in formation to secure the area. When we arrived, the dumpster was still smoldering, the tractor broken and askew, and the thirty police standing absolutely motionless, surrounded by hundreds of pacifists. The alley was tight enough they had managed to completely cut them off. The police had maybe a couple yards clear in front of and behind them, after that, it was an impenetrable wall of human beings. Someone told us the standoff had now been going on for almost an hour. There was a sizeable band of drummers and other musicians a little bit up the slope, playing slow rhythmic music—actually, it was extremely good, with all sorts of intricate syncopation—and people dancing in hypnotic style. Occasionally someone would leave the human wall and join the dancing, or vice versa. Entranced, I fell away from the Bloc for a moment, promising I’d rendezvous later.
Now the story is the Summit is delayed because the tear gas has gotten in the ventilation system. Or, alternately, that the Brazilian delegation have used this as an excuse to refuse to go in. (Everybody has been counting on the Brazilians to spearhead opposition to the treaty.)
The police are starting to move down into Jean Baptiste, despite our best efforts to delay them. One unit has encircled a nearby intersection.
They’re also trying to take the park again, making liberal use of concussion grenades and pepper spray. The response is an almost dizzying diversity of tactics. There’s a cluster of about thirty activists, mostly students I think, in jeans and T-shirts, some without even bandanas, staging a sit-down. They position themselves right in the path of a police line, those in front raising both arms in the air to flash peace signs. They’re chanting:
We’re nonviolent, how ’bout you?
As the cops get nearer, the activists break into “the whole world is watching!” and two police officers start firing plastic bullets directly into the middle of the crowd. Someone screams. Someone carries someone off, but the rest hold their position. A priest appears and interposes himself. He’s talking with the police. Some Radical Cheerleaders, with black and red pompoms and outrageous hairdos, walk up and begin one of their elaborate chants nearby. Apparently reassured, the cops return to the fence.
Almost immediately thereafter, four molotov cocktails sail over the fence after them. I see a few figures running off in the mist. Oddly, they don’t look much like activists: the two I see most clearly seem stocky, fortyish. One rather reminds me of the fellow who’d been complaining about the tear gas on his stoop a few hours before (but I’m pretty sure it isn’t him).
I never saw anyone with a firebomb that weekend who wasn’t speaking French.
Finally, the pieces started to fall together: Montréal Ya Basta! explaining about how there are different standards about violence in Québec, CASA’s confusing refusal to disallow molotovs, even as they appealed for community support, the delegation of citizens telling us to fight the cops—even Mac’s diatribe in Little Italy about how the truly oppressed either sit back or fight back, and are not interested in elaborate codes of nonviolence. This is a community with an extremely militant tradition of resistance. Both the priest and the bombers actually represented the same phenomenon: a community beginning to actively intervene on our behalf.
A bearded guy on stilts, in an elaborate green-sequined costume, strides up to the fence with an enormous peace sign. The cops turn on the water cannon and blast him square in the chest. He flies backwards about twenty feet. Medics run up, make sure his spine isn’t broken, then turn the stilts into splints and quickly, keeping their heads low, whisk him away.
A huge plume rises over the park. Helicopters rattle overhead.
Another mortar round. Cheers as someone throws it back. Two smokebombs go with it.
“Hey, nonviolent!” someone shouts.
Someone else: “Is there anyone who might be pregnant? They’re using CS gas!”
A police squad starts nabbing activists at the edge of the park. It’s perhaps the first time I’ve actually witnessed an arrest. I leave the park and head downhill again.
What follows is something of a blur. I completely gave up on taking notes. I somehow wind up with a column of about twenty-five or thirty Black Bloc’ers who attempt a charge on a fenced position… I think it was along St. Jean again, where a flaming shopping cart had almost collapsed the wall an hour or two before. About halfway through the charge, we’re pepper-bombed; at least, it’s the same blinding sensation I had experienced at the wall, going right through my gas mask. I stumble back a ways. By chance, there’s a medic on a nearby stoop, a young man of eighteen or twenty who looks like he’s from Senegal or Cameroon, with spiked hair and a hefty plastic first aid kit. He offers me the full anti-pepper treatment, and we find a sheltered space where he carefully washes my eyes and face with some kind of antacid solution, then scrubs and washes it out with mineral oil. I feel considerably better.
By the time I find the remnants of the Bloc, though, there are only a little over a dozen of them, and a big blonde fellow remarks sternly that no one recognizes me. Where’s my affinity group? Maybe you should go try to find them. I look around for Kitty and the rest of La Resistance, but no one is around. I could have sworn I was with them earlier. Still a little dazed, I can’t remember anyone’s names, let alone action names. Buffy is a ways off resting against a wall with her eyes closed. I’ve forgotten her name too. I tell him, good idea, yeah, I’m sure they must have moved down to the park or something, and head off to take myself a breather.
Big blonde guy suddenly takes on a kindly tone. “Hey, good luck! I’m sure it won’t take long to find them.”
At the park, things are getting ever more intense. A small squad of people with fire bombs are trying to destroy the water cannon. Every time they get close to being in range, carefully diving in between its mechanical sweeps, police open fire with plastic bullets. I watch two molotovs make beautiful arcs and land within a few feet of the machine, producing spectacular, but momentary, splashes of flame. They don’t seem to do any damage.
No snatch squads appear to be operating at the moment, so I lie down to rest; but it seemed almost as soon as I had rested a few minutes Buffy is there, tapping me on the shoulder. “Hey, David! We’re trying to gather some folks together to head down towards the highway. There’s a main entry point there that’s really lightly guarded.”
“Are there any other members of your affinity group in the park?”
“No, I think I lost them.”
Within a few minutes I’m back with the Bloc, in the same spot as before, but this time everyone is there: La Resistance, Craig’s group, the PEI kids—only Montréal is missing. We head down St. Jean, then downhill to the occasional cheers of pedestrians, descend to the highway and scope out the situation.
The situation though turns out to be a little too hectic for my taste. There’s already a battle going on, with at least five or six cops crouched in the darkness behind a wide chain-link gate, red lasers from their sights sweeping and darting everywhere. There’s a huge empty stretch of asphalt, and sheltered spaces where people—I think they’re students, definitely not Black Bloc, but really I have no idea who they are—are mixing molotovs in empty glass coke-bottles. Every minute or so one will emerge from their cover and loft it over the gate.
“It doesn’t look so lightly defended any more,” I say to Buffy.
She furls her brow as another splash of flame lights up the gate momentarily. “Well, we’ll see what we can make of it.”
The Bloc itself had long since consensed on no molotovs, but now that the genie was out of the bottle, as it were, some of us were at least willing to help prepare them. “After all,” someone says, “we said we’d follow the lead of the local people.” Others—Lee for instance—are looking extremely skeptical. I found the whole scene enormously disturbing. CS was landing everywhere. Cops were firing apparently indiscriminately. There was one weird guy twirling slowly around in the very middle of everything, dancing in and out of the lights and clouds to a music that must have existed only in his head.
“Jeez, what would make someone act like that?” someone asks.
“I’m guessing Ecstasy.”
I figure this is why they tell you never to bring drugs to an action.
Myself, I have no interest in helping anyone try to set someone else on fire— even police in flame-retardant body armor—so it occurs to me this might not be a bad moment to check in with the IMC. I will make one last attempt to locate Karen. They’ll probably have a clearer idea what’s going on in the city, too, and whether we’ve really shut down the Summit. Retreating to a nearby streetlamp to consult my map, I realize it’s quite close. I wave good luck to everyone (nobody really notices), watch for a moment as they descend to positions closer to the gate.
A few minutes later, I’m passing under a highway ramp where Food Not Bombs is rolling out vast tureens for an upcoming free kitchen. There’s a small tent village, and punk-rockers setting up a sound system from the back of a truck. This must be the Ile Fleuriot. It’s kind of a grimy, clammy space, but there are already a few hundred people starting to gather for the party. I make a note: I’m supposed to be meeting people here at the party later on. Then I pass the now shuttered Army/Navy store and, finally, descend into the IMC.
At the IMC, everything is different. For one thing, there’s security now. No one is allowed inside without an Indymedia ID. There’s a big fellow at the door, who seems to belong to the building. Downstairs, where once there had been a handful of drowsy, happy activists, the space is now crammed and full of grim efficiency. On the tables are rows of computers and video cameras; there are laptops all over the floor. Wires cover everything. Every electric socket has an extension cord and seven or eight devices plugged into it. Near the door is an enormous pile of gear, gas masks, raincoats, water bottles, every sort of protective equipment. On the walls, lists of rules, work shifts, teams, phone numbers, events. Next to the door is an improvised security desk where you show your ID a second time; behind it, a girl with dark curly hair who looks like a high school student. I flash my IMC card. It turns out she is, in fact, a high school student: part of a small group from another province who are in the city on some sort of alternative media grant. She looks more than a little overwhelmed.
Maybe a third of the faces are familiar to me from other actions. I spot Celia, who I met in the IMC in Philadelphia during the Republican Convention. At the time, we were both working on the team doing liaison with the corporate media. I was a complete neophyte. She, in her mid-thirties, was an experienced media activist, who ended up organizing most of our press conferences.
“Hey, Celia!”
“Oh, hi, David. Just get into town?”
“No, I got through at Akwesasne. One of the few. Been here since Friday morning. You?”
“Me? I’ve been in town since Wednesday.” She paused. “So, what do you think?”
“I’ve never experienced anything like it.” I started going on about Friday and the exhilaration of bringing down the wall.
Celia, however, is unimpressed by macho heroics, and starts telling me instead about her own high point: a ceremony on the first day conducted by the Living River. Had I seen it? She had just been editing images from it on a nearby computer: the blue stream coming to rest along the streets of St. Jean, everything falling silent, then, suddenly, a hundred people simultaneously throwing rolls of toilet paper into the air, creating an effect like a fluttering, billowing sea. After which a Wiccan offered a beautiful incantation.
The images on the computer screen were small and I doubted they really give a full sense of the moment. Still, they were impressive. I look them over even after Celia is called away a moment later, then poke around until I find the legal person who has been keeping track of IMC arrestees. There have been several, but most of them within the last several hours and none of them were Karen. Neither has anyone been in contact with her.
I do find someone who knows Sasha’s number, so I use the IMC phone to call him. But it goes straight to voicemail. I check messages. Call friends.
Is it possible she just went home and didn’t tell anyone? For an activist, that would have been incredibly irresponsible. But of course, Karen is not an activist.
Independent Media Centers are another institution born of the WTO protests in Seattle: they are meant to be a way for activist journalists to provide their own account of events, and actually convey the protesters’ message, which the corporate media almost never does. By 2001, there were permanent IMCs in most major North American cities and, increasingly, across the world. Huge ones would also come into being temporarily during every major mobilization. IMCs ran on essentially anarchist principles. Everything was done collectively: people edited each other’s stories; there was no hierarchy of editors and reporters; all decisions were made by consensus. The IMC would host live radio shows, prepare videos, and during the key days of action, release a daily newspaper reporting on events. Most immediately, though, it maintained a web page, where one could find up-to-the-minute information on the actions as they happened. One side of the page was open—anyone could post—and, therefore, it largely resembled the rumor mill on the streets; but the center of the page was all dispatches from IMC reporters, who prided themselves on maintaining more exacting standards of accuracy than the corporate press.
Here at the activist info hub, I was finally able to start piecing together the kind of comprehensive, panoramic information that is simply unavailable on the streets. The picture was frightening.
The police had been moving downhill steadily since 6PM, much more rapidly than they had the day before. This time, their strategy was first to seize key points and intersections, then to follow up with mop-up operations and arrest anyone still on the streets within occupied territory. They were also adopting a posture of hands-on brutality. Several Indymedia videographers had already been beaten and arrested. One of the first police targets was the Clinic, where our medics were treating all the worst injuries. First, police had lobbed tear gas directly through the windows, shattering glass and forcing the medics to evacuate the wounded. Fifteen minutes later, a squad of police showed up at the new, makeshift clinic they’d created in the alleyway outside and marched everyone out at gunpoint, rousting patients out of stretchers, appropriating medical supplies, stripping everyone of goggles and gas masks and even vinegar-soaked bandanas, then driving them down the long stairs that wound down from the Côte d’Abraham. The big battle had now shifted to the heart of the Green Zone. Thousands of people had gathered for the free food and dance party that was supposed to celebrate the day’s action. Many were coming from the march and People’s Summit; there were children and old people. Then, suddenly, the police attacked. The acre-wide “Temporary Autonomous Zone” under the highway was transformed into a vast cloud of tear gas. Would-be partygoers responded by occupying the highway overhead. The police were currently trying to dislodge them, but there were by now at least three thousand of them and they were putting up stiff resistance.
We didn’t have clear numbers yet for arrests and injuries. Official numbers, dutifully repeated by TV and wire services, were sheerest fantasy: the cops were reporting about forty injuries since Friday, of which, they claimed, about half were police. Our medics were reporting they had treated over a thousand injuries on the first day alone: including several asthmatics who nearly died from the gas, dozens of broken bones and some very serious burns. The authorities were also still claiming that only a few dozen had been arrested, despite the sweeps in the Old City. This also could not possibly be true. We were already receiving the usual frightening reports, by now familiar in the US, of intentional abuse of prisoners. Buses full of handcuffed detainees were being driven in circles around the city for twelve or thirteen hours to avoid legalities; arrestees who actually were booked were being hog-tied, denied access to water or toilet facilities; injured activists were being denied medical treatment, stripped, hosed down with icy water and left freezing in unheated cells.
Everyone is worrying the IMC will be the next target. This is not just because of its obvious strategic importance in giving activists (and everybody else) some idea what’s going on. Apparently, someone had scanned several pages of text that appeared to be from the police SUVs broken into the night before, with detailed intelligence reports and contingency plans on police strategy, and uploaded it to the IMC web page the night before. The editors immediately removed it and passed it on to the IMC in Seattle, who published it—noting there was no way to be sure whether it was forged or genuine. A few hours later Seattle police closed down the IMC there. It seemed reasonable to expect that, given the circumstances, the Québec IMC might be next.
The worst news, however, is that it now looks like one protester has actually been shot dead. It’s not completely certain. The report first comes in by phone, from an IMC reporter by the highway. This creates a major crisis, because the question now becomes what to report. A meeting is called. It starts with maybe a dozen people huddled around a desk and ends up including almost everyone:
Chuck: Well, let me present this as a formal proposal then. We have an eye-witness report that a protester has been killed after being shot in the throat with a plastic bullet near the highway. Apparently some medics tried CPR, and when he didn’t come around, they eventually managed to get him to an ambulance and that’s the last anyone’s seen of him. So I’m proposing we put the information we have on the web page. Bearing in mind that, in doing so, we’d also be effectively releasing it to the corporate media.
Celia: There’s also a counter-proposal that a small group of us do the leg-work to get full confirmation before we run anything. We’re not the corporate media. For them, one confirmation would be enough; our job is to do it better. So the proposal is not to run with the story unless we have at least two confirmations.
Chuck: Well, I agree we should definitely create such a team in any event.
Helen. I’m taking stack for anyone who wants to express concerns now, or commentary. Bill?
Bill: Well, for my own part, I’d prefer, if possible, to keep corporate media out of this, because they’re fuckers.
Suzette: I agree with the second proposal. We have to check further.
Andrew: I also managed to get through to a street medic who confirmed the first part of the story: a young man was shot in the throat, he collapsed, he wasn’t breathing, medics tried to revive him, and he was eventually taken to a hospital.
Helen: So we can report that as confirmed?
Ben: I’d say, since that part is confirmed, let’s assemble a small team to investigate; see if we can get any further information from the hospital.
Helen: So you’re supporting the second proposal?
Ben: Yeah.
[There are people coming in from the stairs, stripping off gear, talking excitedly]
Helen: Quiet please! We have a consensus process going on!
Annette: I think we should think seriously about the effects of releasing anything this potentially explosive without having absolute confirmation.
Randy: As for first proposal, I agree with Annette. We have over ten thousand people here facing several thousand cops. It’s already halfway to a war out there. If we spread the word that somebody died, do we want to be responsible for the result?
[A couple people shout “yes!”]
Annette: Look, we know the corporate media is watching everything we’re doing. We put it out there, they’ll run with it. If we say something that isn’t true, I don’t even want to think about what’ll happen.
Noah: And people out there are already pissed off enough at the cops.
Chuck: …and more likely to be in the streets, getting it from the rumor mill. Word will go out that this happened. It’s possible, if we run a story saying only what’s already confirmed, then someone who knows the rest of the story will call in and tell us. It might be the only realistic way we could have of finding out.
Riley: We’ve already had reports of several molotovs having been thrown, several points where there have been pitched battles with the cops.
[Everyone is standing in a circle by now.]
Suzette: There have also been a lot of incorrect rumors about the Summit being shut down. How do we know any of those stories are even true?
David: Well, I can confirm the molotovs. I’ve seen quite a few of them by now.
Sheila: Excuse me—point of process. This entire meeting is being conducted in English. Is there anyone who doesn’t speak English and wants an explanation of what’s going on?
[One woman does. Sheila gives her an update in French and provides simultaneous translation for the rest of the discussion.]
Helen: Well, it sounds to me like we’ve come to…
Jamie [newly arrived ]: Look, I saw this guy get shot! This happened.
Andrew: Wait, you were there? You saw it?
From the Door: COPS ARE ENTERING THE BUILDING!
The meeting dissolves into a scramble. The cops must be in the upstairs offices, since apparently they’re not yet on the stairs. Someone shouts: “QUICKLY, GET THE KEY! GET IT RIGHT NOW!” Someone else is checking the stairs; others grab phones, punching steadily trying to find an open line, trying to contact IMC reporters on the street. After a moment, the crisis subsides. It looks like the cops hadn’t done more than poke their heads in, shoot a bullet down the stairs just to scare us, and then make off. Slowly, everyone tries to breathe again, change registers, exit crisis mode. The meeting reconvenes and Jamie, the eyewitness, still geared up with a red bandana and green goggles on top of his head, provides more details: this one guy, the victim, was for some reason by himself not far from the wall, maybe twenty meters from the police. Suddenly two shots rang out and he was hit twice in rapid succession, once in the shoulder, once in the throat. You could see from the lasers that they were aiming directly at his head.
I had a horrified thought: was this that same guy I’d seen dancing in the middle of the melee down by the highway. It had to be. Who else could it be? It would be amazing if that guy hadn’t gotten shot. Or, no… didn’t someone else say it happened in an area outside of the action?
Helen: So it sounds like the emerging consensus is around the second proposal: not to send anything out immediately, but to try to confirm the story. Does anyone have serious concerns with that?
Bill: I’m still not clear how we would do that. We don’t know the guy’s name. The only way to confirm the name would be from the cops.
Celia: We can contact all the local hospitals. I’ll volunteer to be in the team so we can, eventually, publish this.
Joe: I’m really afraid that if we spread false rumors, we’ll seriously discredit ourselves.
Riley [on the phone]: I’m getting a report from an IMC reporter on the streets outside; he says there’s all sorts of police brutality going on up above. Apparently six cops are surrounding the door right now…
Someone else: Some medics say they’re coming down. It’s an emergency.
Annette: We have to bear in mind the whole world is watching us. If anything we report turns out to be inaccurate, no one will ever forget it. I wouldn’t even mention the fact that there are rumors at this point.
(Medics enter)
The medics were, unsurprisingly, looking for a new space to set up shop. Could they use the upstairs offices for a temporary clinic? The consensus seems to be that it’s not likely to be a very safe location, since we’re probably about to be invaded ourselves, but there are not a whole lot of viable alternatives. The medics take off to alert their network.
As a space, the IMC was particularly vulnerable. First of all, there was only one point of access: the stairs. If the police did show up, we’d all be instantly trapped here in the basement. Second, the building did not seem to have a functioning ventilation system. One tear gas canister down the stairs would make it uninhabitable. Already people were jamming scarves and sweaters under the cracks of the doors to prevent bad air from seeping in. The question is, if the cops do try to enter, should we try to defend the space, should we practice nonviolent civil disobedience (everyone sit on the floor, refuse to comply with orders, go limp if they try to carry us), or should we surrender and comply? An earlier meeting had consensed on the second strategy, but in light of developments it was critical to make sure everyone was still on the same page. Also, to try to ensure we have enough advance warning that anyone unwilling to risk arrest was given an option to get out beforehand.
Hardly has this meeting begun, however, when we’re faced with another medical crisis. A young woman is escorted down the stairs, carrying a seven-month-old baby. She’s sobbing quietly. The baby’s screaming. Her IMC escort is desperately searching for a medic.
“Medics? I think they just left.”
“Why? What happened?”
“Is the baby sick?”
“The fuckers gassed it.”
“What? They gassed a baby?”
Her escort explains the mother is a Food Not Bombs volunteer, who was down at the Green Zone ladling soup when the police attacked. She immediately grabbed her child and took off for higher ground, but a canister landed directly at her feet as she was fleeing.
“Wow. Do you think it was an accident or do you think they actually saw the baby?”
The mother, who up to now had been silent, glared at him. “Of course they saw the baby!” she said, in thickly accented English. “They were thirty meters away from us!”
“The motherfuckers!”
Half the people in the room were speechless. Two women offered to hold the infant, whose face was bright crimson, tried to bounce and quiet him. His name, we learned, was Gabe.
“I can’t believe they gassed a fucking baby.”
“And they wonder why people throw rocks at the police.”
Someone fetches water; someone else suggests they wait for the medics at the very top of the stairwell, where there’s a landing on the sixth floor with an open window and relatively untainted air (it had previously been used as the IMC smoking section). It’s after eight and I’m beginning to think it will actually be safer under the highway, where at least there’ll be escape routes. A woman who is part of some locally based documentary collective is at the pile of gear, holding up my gas mask. Can she use it “for just ten minutes?” Her crew just wants to go outside to get a few shots of the police.
“Well, is there chance it will be longer than ten minutes? Because I really have to leave.”
“No, no,” she says. “We will be right back.”
I hesitate, make a subjective assessment of the situation. She is a professional videographer, with the kind of air of abrupt efficiency that, to me at least, suggests “person who would lie about this sort of thing without even thinking about it.” On the other hand, we are in the sort of communal situation where one cannot really refuse a direct request without an explicit reason, and I really can’t say I have one.
“Okay. But I really am going to need it back in ten minutes.”
Half an hour later, I’m still waiting. I spend some time futzing around the office, once again confirming that none of the innumerable cell phone rechargers in the IMC will, in fact, recharge my make of phone. I try to see if there’s work I can do—I did promise to contribute an hour’s work, back when I got my ID card. But everyone is far too distracted. Neither is it possible to find a free computer on which to check my email. Without my mask, I’m basically trapped here. Anyway, if I leave, I’ll definitely never get it back. So I head upstairs to help with the baby, who is still up on the landing. Even there, there’s not too much I can do other than provide moral support, but it’s a fascinating space, all concrete and industrial, with two big factory-style windows tilted slightly open. From one, you can see a rooftop now occupied by police. They’re only twenty or thirty feet away, some of them, though, still utterly impersonal in gas masks, visors, and armor. They don’t seem to be aware of us.
With nothing better to do, I started to scribble:
The problem with the IMC is it’s a bubble—not just in the literal sense (no one wishing to open doors or windows and risk the tear gas getting in), but also because it’s sealed off from the sense of immediacy, fellowship, and spontaneous intimacy you have on the streets where you’re facing continual, tangible danger. Here, everything is mediated. You’re in a florescent room full of screens and monitors, you see nothing for yourself but still you know each and every one of the worst things that are happening: every arrest, every grievous injury, every new police outrage. The resulting mood isn’t exactly one of hysteria; it is more a kind of manic jumpiness that comes from having far too much information.
But, on reflection, isn’t this what news basically consists of? A national report largely consists of the worst things that happen, in any given day, in America. An international report lists the worst things that have happened in the world.
Finally, around 8:45, the video crew returns, chattering animatedly in French. Then they’re about to leave again.
“Excuse me, my gas mask?”
Upstairs, the building security guy is only allowing people out in groups, for fear of letting gas inside the building. “I really don’t recommend going outside right now,” he tells me. “There are cops all over. It’s extremely dangerous.”
I tell him I’ll take my chances. Finally, after about five minutes, someone is rapping on the glass door from the outside, and I’m back on the streets.
Free at last! At least, oddly, that’s what it feels like to be back in the war zone.
Riot cops occupy the wooden stage at the very top of the great stairs leading up to the Old City; they seem to have taken all the commanding eminences. This entire area of the city is wreathed in gas. They’re using the more powerful, military grade stuff that everyone refers to as “CS” though I don’t know if it really is (the IMC people weren’t sure). Just breathing without a mask is already physically painful; passing through low-lying areas leaves the unprotected coughing and gagging; new rounds are falling regularly. There are only a few shadowy figures on the street. I take a lane behind the IMC that seems like it’s leading to the highway, and almost immediately run into Kitty. We both start laughing.
We hug. It’s probably the seventh time we’ve hugged today.
“So what’s up? Where’s everybody? Are they all okay?”
“Well, Andrea got hit twice and went home. She gave her gas mask to Lee (I get the sleeping bag). Everyone else is okay. We’re all down at the Temporary Autonomous Zone under the highway. We’ve been under attack for at least an hour now. It’s amazing! There are thousands of people there now, more coming all the time. There was a pitched battle, and we won.”
She goes on to describe the building of a giant bonfire in the TAZ space to neutralize the tear gas. The police brought up a water cannon to try to put it out. But people stuck it out. Meanwhile, more and more ordinary citizens are joining us. There are now thousands on the highway. They’re calling them the “bangers” because, for an hour now, they’ve been just banging rhythmically on the metal barriers on the side of the highway, making so much of a racket that it can easily be heard at the Convention Center ten blocks away. The police started mortaring the highway too, and sent lines of troops to clear the area using beanbag guns and plastic bullets, but to no avail. Even when they started using the water cannon. Old people, families, union folk, everyone started raining bricks and boards and flaming debris down at the cops. Finally, the police withdrew.
“So what are you doing here?” I ask.
“We heard a rumor they might be moving on the IMC. I came to check if people need any help down here. What about you?”
“I was checking for news of Karen and ended up getting trapped in the IMC for an hour when someone borrowed my gas mask.”
“Oh, I heard someone got in contact with Sasha, who said Karen was arrested and they took her to Montréal.”
“Really? Who did you hear that from?”
“Somebody.” She thinks a second. “No, can’t remember. Maybe someone from New York? And do you know anything about this rumor that somebody got killed down by the highway?”
“It’s all they’ve been talking about at the IMC for the last hour or two. But nobody seems to know if the guy is really dead.”
As we scout the police positions around the IMC, we keep running into old friends. Simon, from New York, strolls out of the mist in a helmet, shield, and arm and shin guards, of exactly the sort we had been using in Ya Basta! He seems as surprised as we that he managed to get it through, and about as pleased with himself as anyone could possibly be. A lot of New York people, he reports, are finally getting through. We join most of the Refugees, various Black Bloc elements, and local residents, and set up a makeshift defense of the IMC. As police helicopters buzz overheard, people strip the boards from shops that have been boarded over, create a bonfire. Then we all start building barricades, making use of metal fences collected from the little park near the foot of the stair.
It’s not a moment too soon, as buses and vans full of police reinforcements are beginning to concentrate just a block or two up the road. Battles ensue. We’re driven from our positions, disperse, return, build the barricades again. We make endless phone calls trying to get reporters from the corporate press to witness the scene, hoping their presence will keep the police from invading the building. They never respond. Nonetheless, despite a few tear gas shells lobbed in windows on the stairwell, police never end up entering the building itself.
We finally get a chance to pay back our work commitment to the IMC. Shawn has a radio and agrees to do street reports for the 11—4 shift. This also gives the Refugees a new raison d’etre, and an excuse to more or less follow the action in this part of the city.
The city itself has taken on a near insurrectionary quality. It soon becomes apparent that the police have completely overplayed their hand. By dispersing their forces so far from the wall, they’ve ended up with no clear zones of control whatsoever: even most of Jean Baptiste is liberated territory again, with barricades and bonfires being built at a dozen different locations. We wander along the Côte d’Abraham, a winding path along the bottom of a steep bluff, the very foot of the Old City, trying to find a way back up. Isolated clusters of people are walking along the road. Many seem to be apolitical, local boys out for a good time. One good-natured crew toast us as they pass, “This is a very good night for drinking beer!” Another young man had been hit by a plastic bullet on the buttocks and is showing the welt to everyone he meets. (“Look at that! Can you see what those pigs did to me?”) It’s as if the easy camaraderie of the day before has now extended to the entire city—though, as we climb into the Old City, we do see a couple acts of drunken randomness as beer bottles fly through closed shop windows.
One was a corner print shop that seemed pretty obviously of the “mom and pop” variety.
“Tsk, tsk. That’s not a legitimate target, is it?” says Lyn.
“On the other hand,” Heidi observes, “compared with what happens after a hockey championship in this town, this is nothing. There’s usually hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of damage. I think even the hooligans are holding back.”
Up in the Old City, African and Asian immigrants are among the crowds defending positions against the police. Children and old people have already been evacuated. We keep running into activists from New York. Brad Will, an eco-activist living in the NYC IMC, has just got into town; he’s got a huge backpack and his face is swathed in a ripped T-shirt, reeking of vinegar. “The problem,” he says, “is that people just can’t take the gas. We’d have driven them out of the entire neighborhood if it wasn’t for the gas.”
Brad directs us to a particularly dramatic scene further up the hill that might be worth reporting. Ben and I climb up the hill to investigate. There’s a major battle going on as residents crouch behind a barricade of sofas, wooden doors, and bric-a-brac obviously dragged out from their basements; cops are firing on them from a position behind three or four police vehicles further up the street. Young men are pouring gasoline and sugar into empty bottles from a big plastic canister; then they stuff the bottles with rags and leave them near the edge of the barricade. Periodically, someone will take one, dash up to a little lot between two buildings, light it, and hurl it at the police—then run back again. The police, in turn, are firing pepper bombs behind the barricades to try to force people to come up for air, then shooting at their heads with plastic bullets. I watch as a molotov sails up, misses its target, and lands on the wooden lintel of a second-story window, setting a tiny fire. No one seems particularly alarmed.
“Jeez, they’re going to burn down their own neighborhood!”
A moment later I was blind and couldn’t breathe. Another pepper bomb. I have a distinct memory of telling myself “keep your head down, keep your head down” and, a second later, feeling like someone had just broken a bottle over my head. This is odd because no one has ever broken a bottle over my head and in fact I have no idea what it would feel like, but that was my first reaction. Apparently, I did manage to keep mostly down, and the bullet ricocheted off the very top of my head, coming to rest thirty feet behind us. I sat on the ground a second, then retreated as someone ran past, shouting something helpful in French. Back at the foot of the hill, Brad, still sputtering from the tear gas, presented me with the bullet—or anyway, it was probably the same bullet. “If that’s your first,” he said, “you might want to keep it.”
The bullet is gigantic: made of something that felt like hard green rubber, mallet-shaped, large enough to fill the palm of my hand. I tell myself: it’s a lucky thing I swallowed one of those codeine tablets an hour ago, just in case.
We end up, a few hours later, at a little shop-lined park on the edge of the lower city, at the corner of Coronne and Charest, where another huge bonfire has become the center of a spontaneous street party. Someone’s brought out a sound system, people are smoking dope and dancing in the flamelight. Others stream in from the highway, or get called away to battles a few blocks away. Cars occasionally appear, take one look at the scene, and desperately U-turn away. When we head home around 4AM, there’s talk of making yet another attack on the wall, this time from the Plains of Abraham. There are also rumors that the government was calling in the army.
The next morning we were all aglow.
Ben: “That was just hugely successful.”
Shawn: “It was definitely the most impressive demo I’ve ever been in.”
“And I know the people of Québec City are going to have another one soon.”
I asked: “So, who exactly were all those people making noise on the highway all night? Were they really union people from the People’s Summit?”
“That was the amazing thing,” said Lyn. “They were everybody. Union people. Kids. Grannies. Old hippies. Ordinary citizens of every kind.”
“I saw high school kids,” someone chimes in, “mothers with kids, one mother-daughter team both banging away at the guard-rails with sticks. People formed a kind of impromptu rotation system to make sure the sound never started to die down.”
“A lot of the union people had come with masks and bottles of vinegar with them on the bus, already organized into affinity groups and everything.”
“If you think about it,” said Shawn, “it was the perfect civil disobedience, because we could make this huge racket that you could hear a mile away. They could definitely hear it at the summit and the hotels where the delegates were staying. But at the same time we just couldn’t be dislodged. People were already starting to bang at noon and I came back hours later and it was still going just as strong.”
“Also, they were so high up I think the delegates in the Convention Center could actually see them.”
Conversations like this were to continue for days, even weeks, to come, and gradually crystallize in formal “report-backs” to groups at home, web narratives, and published IMC reports, the movies and books that we all knew would eventually come out of this, if restricted to an almost exclusively activist audience. During an action, after all, one is surrounded by an almost infinity of potential narratives, some more immediate (“the cops are moving in on the IMC!”), others more abstract (“the Brazilians are looking for an excuse to sabotage the Summit”), all open-ended, uncertain, most of which everyone knows will turn out irrelevant or untrue. No one, not even at the IMC, is in a position to begin to speculate about how the story as a whole will be told afterwards, especially who won. Insofar as a game was being played, the rules of the game—even the precise nature of the field and players—were being negotiated and renegotiated continually, in action. No one involved was in direct contact with more than a tiny percentage of it (I, for instance, never saw the parade, the Bridge CD or Living River), and it was only in retrospect that we could come up with a plausible theory of what the stakes of the battle even were. Not that there is ever one definitive story, even years later—there never is, with any historical event. But these conversations played a crucial role in narrowing things down.
By noon we were back to yet another CLAC spokescouncil, somewhere on the Côte d’Abraham. The night’s battles were all over, the bonfires not even smouldering—all out. The barricades, even, seemed to have been systematically destroyed by bulldozers, and large numbers of activists had already left town. Much of the discussion was about whether it would be possible to round up enough people to march on the Ministry of Justice to protest the weekend’s police repression. There was also supposed to be a demo going on at the Grand Théâtre, near the water cannon, and a party somewhere else, but nothing inspiring enough to keep us from falling back to the University, to start gathering up our things to go.
Wind-down days of an action are always the most dangerous. In big mobilizations, activist numbers tend to peak at the beginning and then decline steadily, owing to injuries, arrests, and before long, people simply returning to their lives or jobs. Police numbers, on the other hand, remain constant. As soon as the balance of forces begins to tilt significantly, they will usually start to take revenge for perceived humiliations of the days before. Actions of any sort become increasingly dangerous; so, often, does walking down the street, as the cops will often begin the sort of random mass arrests they weren’t able to earlier. Anyone walking alone in gear, or even in green hair, piercings, or tattoos, might be a target; but small groups are not necessarily safe either. At the same time, it’s only during the wind-down that those who participated in the actions begin to get a clear picture of what happened—are able to sort the good information from the bad and, above all, start constructing some overall picture of the event as a whole. The result is a combination of increasing paranoia on the ground and an enormous flow of new and retrospective information. It was as if the sense I’d had at the IMC—the combination of sweeping panoramic view, and claustrophobic terror—had now expanded to fill the entire city, or at least, those parts that activists inhabited.
Back at Laval, Mac was hard at work answering phones and going through lists of arrestees at the legal office. Shawn carried out an interview with a CASA organizer from the Comité Populaire du St. Jean-Baptiste, who emphasized the need to move away from summit hopping and do work within communities. Rumor had it more people had just got in from New York. I returned to the gym, now largely empty except for endless piles of backpacks, to find them. There were at most a hundred people left. Montréal Ya Basta! were performing a little improvisation on the drums. I spent a while chatting with them, taking notes on gear and tactics to bring back to New York Ya Basta!, if, indeed, one still existed.
There was, in fact, an affinity group of seven who had just made it through, including Eric and Enos from New York and a famous activist called Bork, from D.C. Meeting them was a little disorienting at first. I had just spent two days on the streets, where anyone you met who wasn’t actually shooting at you was your brother or your sister; they were just heading into action, full of secret plans and grim intensity. Still, I got to learn a little about what had happened to my friends. After everyone turned around at the customs gate at Akwesasne, they gathered to decide what to do next. Night had fallen, our few Mohawk patrons had all crossed the border and abandoned us, and figures in the darkness began shooting the occasional paintball at our vehicles. The caravan only got back to Burlington around 3AM. Some went home. Some tried to submit themselves to customs at other places the next day. Some got through. All reported aggressive questioning aimed at establishing if they were in any way associated with an organization called “Ya Basta!” Warcry joined a crew dubbed the “Snowshoe Brigade,” that crossed on foot through a forest in the middle of the night. They got caught when one inexperienced kid panicked and asked a cop for directions. The remaining Ya Basta! contingent tried to take the legal route, but, after submitting themselves to customs twice, all ended up in immigration detention. Except, amusingly, for Moose. He was just turned away. Sasha was locked up with them: that’s why his phone was dead. All of them were all being taken to Montréal for processing and presumably being released in a couple days. Karen, who it transpires did indeed just take off on Friday without telling anyone, is already in Montréal trying to find some way to reach Sasha.
Eventually, we hold a small New York meeting. Brad reports that the streets are growing increasingly dangerous, with black SUVs everywhere, along with stretch undercover vans, with guard windows, that seem to be Canadian intelligence. They’re picking up anyone with gear—padding or shields, certainly, but even medics or IMC journalists with video cameras. Simon was arrested just this morning. Several other New Yorkers showed up in the city only to be immediately caught in sweeps.
We come up with a plan. Those who have been in action had probably best get out of town. We’ll fall back on Montréal and do jail support for our friends in immigration detention, who should be coming up for hearings soon.
Returning to the law offices, I’m surprised to discover Rufus, an old friend and legendary action medic from New York, waiting in line for vegetarian burritos at a free kitchen that’s been set up in a nearby hall. Kitty and Lee are there too. Rufus had been working with the medical team since Saturday and has all the details about casualties. It turns out someone was indeed shot in the throat, but he isn’t dead. He’d stopped breathing for a while because his larynx was crushed, but medics managed to get him breathing and doctors later saved his life by performing a tracheotomy. He will never speak again. That was the worst single injury. Another man had his finger ripped off trying to tear down the wall but a medic sewed it right back on again. (Kitty: “Oh, I saw that happen! It wasn’t from close up, but…he was gripping this cord and trying to pull down a section of wall, when this cop climbed on top of a fence and yanked back at it. His finger came right off. He was just standing there, stunned, and everybody was screaming “Medic!” Then one ran up, grabbed the finger, and went off with him.”) There was another who lost an ear when a tear gas canister hit his earring. A lot of broken arms and fractured ribs.
“You weren’t hit yourself, were you?” asked Lee. “Because they were definitely targeting street medics. I saw that. Not just shooting to scare them, aiming at them.”
There is a long line of buses on the main road through campus; every hour, four or five leave to carry people back to Montréal. There is some question of whether one has to be a student but no one seems to be checking IDs. The big story in the local newspapers is that all the big hotels and restaurants had to throw out tons of food because it was tainted by gas, and that, supposedly, George W. Bush tried to take a swig out of a tainted bottle and had to spew it all out—though it’s hard to imagine how this would really have happened.
We pull together a little group: Rufus, Kitty and Lee, Janna, a couple more.
A march is passing by Des Jardins, maybe two-hundred people, led by red and black flags. I think they’re heading down to the Ministry of Justice. Kitty, who’s going to join us in jail support, has somehow acquired a black flag and banner for us too.
By some miracle, the legal office has a compatible cell phone recharger. With about fifteen minutes worth of juice, I call Alison Haynes, the Montréal Gazette reporter I’d been meaning to call all weekend. It turns out she was at the CIBC bank too, probably one of those reporters I noticed among the onlookers. She says she’d interviewed the rainbow couple afterwards. They were from Vancouver. After we’d left they wrote a note to the CIBC saying “We’re sorry, we did our best to save your bank.”
I haven’t talked to her for more than a minute or two when Rufus comes to tell me we’re going to miss our bus. Then, of course, the phone dies. The next day in Montréal I pick up the paper and find an article with a brief quote from me, explaining it was cut off by my having to high-tail it out of town.
On the bus, everyone is exchanging war stories. A couple of Montréal Yabbas are already heading home. Greg is listing the three corporate targets that got hit: the CIBC, a Shell Oil station that got trashed (the attackers spray-painted the words “Viva Ken Saro Wiwa!”), and a Subway sandwich shop. Not a McDonald’s, as some people were saying. Subway was chosen because it was the second-largest fast food chain in North America, and Canadian owned. Also, some people trashed one of the TV news trucks left in the middle of the park to protest the coverage on the corporate media. He’s pretty dubious though about the “little riot that night. That was pretty lame. I didn’t see it, but I heard a bunch of Québécois nationalists went crazy and ended up wreaking havoc all over the Old City. I heard they even broke the windows of our clinic!”
“No, no,” I said, “that was the cops.”
“Are you sure about that?”
“Absolutely. I was in the IMC at the time. I even talked to the medics who came in afterwards to find a new space.”
“Oh. Still, I don’t know. I wasn’t involved in choosing the targets, but I know that a lot of thought went into it. One bank, one oil company, one fast-food chain, one television network. I just hate to see a bunch of drunken frat boys go out and dilute the message.”
Two kids from the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory are talking about how they were there for Akwesasne, but couldn’t get across the police line at Cornwall.
“Really?” I ask. “Because none of us were really sure we really had any community support.”
“No, no, we just couldn’t get in because the police were out there with shields and batons blocking the road to everybody. Fucking pigs! This is our fucking home and it was like it was under military occupation.”
“Yeah,” says the other kid. “We were ready to start a riot. We’d been with the caravan in Windsor, and we wanted to join you guys in Akwesasne. But there were just too many of them.”
“Really?” I ask. “Wow. I only wish we knew that at the time. We were feeling awfully lonely out there.”
Mainly, though, everyone is just exhausted. Kitty stares out the window for a while. “What a strange come-down,” she says. “You know what it’s like? It’s like coming down from acid. You know, like when you’ve been tripping for days and you come down and suddenly everything just sucks?”
Lee agrees. He’s still feeling weird about the molotovs. “I feel dirty and used.”
Kitty: “I don’t. Well, not used, anyway. But the problem is, when you’re coming down from an action, there’s no way to just take another hit.”
Since this is a book about direct action, it might be best to begin by explaining what that is.
Over the years, hundreds of anarchists have tried to answer this question, in pamphlets and broadsides and speeches. Here’s a sampling:
Direct action implies one’s acting for one’s self, in a fashion in which one may weigh directly the problem with which you are confronted, and without needing the mediation of politicians or bureaucrats. If you see some bulldozers about to wreck your house, you engage in direct action to directly intervene to try to stop them. Direct action places moral conscience up against the official law… It is the expression of the individual’s readiness to fight, to take control of his life, and to try, directly, to act on the world that surrounds us, to take responsibility for one’s actions.
—Sans Titres Bulletin, “What is Direct Action?”
To take a homely example. If the butcher weighs one’s meat with his thumb on the scale, one may complain about it and tell him he is a bandit who robs the poor, and if he persists and one does nothing else, this is mere talk; one may call the Department of Weights and Measures, and this is indirect action; or one may, talk failing, insist on weighing one’s own meat, bring along a scale to check the butcher’s weight, take one’s business somewhere else, help open a cooperative store, etc., and these are direct actions.
—David Wieck, “Habits of Direct Action”
Direct Action aims to achieve our goals through our own activity rather than through the actions of others. It is about people taking power for themselves. In this, it is distinguished from most other forms of political action such as voting, lobbying, attempting to exert political pressure though industrial action or through the media. All of these activities… concede our power to existing institutions which work to prevent us from acting ourselves to change the status quo. Direct Action repudiates such acceptance of the existing order and suggests that we have both the right and the power to change the world. It demonstrates this by doing it. Examples of Direct Action include blockades, pickets, sabotage, squatting, tree spiking, lockouts, occupations, rolling strikes, slow downs, the revolutionary general strike. In the community it involves, amongst other things, establishing our own organizations such as food co-ops and community access radio and TV … Direct Action is not only a method of protest but also a way of “building the future now.” Any situation where people organize to extend control over their own circumstances without recourse to capital or state constitutes Direct Action… Where it succeeds, Direct Action shows that people can control their own lives—in effect, that an Anarchist society is possible.
—Rob Sparrow, “Anarchist Politics and Direct Action”
Every person who ever thought he had a right to assert something, and went boldly and asserted it, himself, or jointly with others that shared his convictions, was a direct actionist… Every person who ever had a plan to do anything, and went and did it, or who laid his plan before others, and won their co-operation to do it with him, without going to external authorities to please do the thing for them, was a direct actionist… Every person who ever in his life had a difference with anyone to settle, and went straight to the other persons involved to settle it, either by a peaceable plan or otherwise, was a direct actionist.
—Voltairine De Cleyre, “Direct Action”
Man has as much liberty as he is willing to take. Anarchism therefore stands for direct action, the open defiance of, and resistance to, all laws and restrictions, economic, social and moral. But defiance and resistance are illegal. Therein lies the salvation of man. Everything illegal necessitates integrity, self-reliance, and courage. In short, it calls for free, independent spirits, for men who are men, and who have a bone in their back which you cannot pass your hand through.
—Emma Goldman, “Anarchism: What It Really Stands For”
It should be easy enough to see why anarchists have always been drawn to the idea of direct action. Anarchists reject states and all those systematic forms of inequality states make possible. They do not seek to pressure the government to institute reforms. Neither do they seek to seize state power for themselves. Rather, they wish to destroy that power, using means that are—so far as possible—consistent with their ends, that embody them. They wish to “build a new society in the shell of the old.” Direct action is perfectly consistent with this, because in its essence direct action is the insistence, when faced with structures of unjust authority, on acting as if one is already free. One does not solicit the state. One does not even necessarily make a grand gesture of defiance. Insofar as one is capable, one proceeds as if the state does not exist.
This is the difference, in principle, between direct action and civil disobedience (though in practice there often is a good deal of overlap between the two). When one burns a draft card, one is withdrawing one’s consent or cooperation from a structure of authority one deems illegitimate, but doing so is still a form of protest, a public act addressed at leastly partly to the authorities themselves. Typically, one practicing civil disobedience is also willing to accept the legal consequences of his actions. Direct action takes matters a step further. The direct actionist does not just refuse to pay taxes to support a militarized school system, she combines with others to try to create a new school system that operates on different principles. She proceeds as she would if the state did not exist and leaves it to the state’s representatives to decide whether to try to send armed men to stop her.
Now, the reader might object: surely direct action does, usually, involve direct confrontation with representatives of the state. Even when it does not start with such a confrontation, everyone is quite aware it will probably lead to one eventually. That would certainly seem to imply recognition of their existence. True enough—but even here matters are more subtle. When confrontations occur, it is typically because those conducting a direct action insist on acting as if the state’s representatives have no more right to impose their view of the rights or wrongs of the situation than anybody else. If a man is driving a truck full of toxic waste to dump in a local river, the direct actionist does not consider whether the corporation he represents is legally permitted to do so; he treats him as he would anyone else trying to dump a vat of poison in a local water source. (By this understanding, the fact that said direct actionist rarely simply attempts to physically overpower the culprit is a remarkable testimony to most activists’ dedication to nonviolence.) Normally, the conclusion is that it is legitimate for any man or woman of conscience in the vicinity to band together to try to dissuade the would-be dumper, and if necessary, stop him—say, by lying down in front of the truck, or by puncturing its tires. If they do so, and twenty armed men in blue costumes then appear and tell them to clear the streets, they do not, in turn, treat this demand as a legal order, but rather, as morally equivalent to any other demand that a group of men standing on the street might make. Therefore, if police demand that those blocking the truck clear the street because an ambulance is trying to get through, they will almost certainly comply; if police make such demands simply by dint of their legal authority as representatives of the city, blockaders will ignore them; if they threaten to attack, blockaders will consider whether they are willing to take the risks involved in making a stand.[9] The key point though is that one is still acting as if, at least as a moral entity, the state does not exist.[10] At any rate it would be possible to have a secret direct action. It is by definition impossible to conduct a secret act of civil disobedience.
What I have been developing here is what might be called the classical definition of direct action—one developed and elaborated over at least a century and a half of anarchist reflection. Often, nowadays, the term is used in a much looser sense. “Direct action” becomes any form of political resistance that is overt, militant, and confrontational, but that falls short of outright military insurrection (e.g. Carter 1973). In this sense, if one is doing more than marching around with signs, but not yet ready to take to the hills with AK-47s, then one is a direct actionist. The Boston Tea Party, during which a team of colonial revolutionaries dressed as Indians dumped loads of heavily taxed British tea in the Boston harbor, is often invoked as a classic example of a direct action of this sort.[11] Such actions tend to be militant and symbolic at the same time. Used this way, the term “direct action” can cover an enormous range: it can mean anything from insisting on one’s right to sit at a segregated lunch counter to setting fire to one, from placing oneself in the way of bulldozers in an old-growth forest to spiking trees so that loggers who disregard warnings not to cut in certain areas risk killing themselves.
Activists too will often talk as if the difference between direct action and civil disobedience is simply one of militancy. For some, it turns on willingness to accept arrest. Those carrying out a “CD” may willingly surrender themselves to the police; even if they don’t, when they blockade the entrance to a corporate headquarters or lie down in front of a presidential motorcade, they act in the full expectation they will wind up in jail, and when police intent on arresting them appear, they will not flee and will resist only passively, or not at all. Direct actionists, in contrast, whether they are breaking windows in the night or soldering the doors shut in worker-occupied factories, are trying their best to get away with it. Or, alternately, the distinction might turn on how closely one’s tactics come to conventional definitions of “violence.” When English suffragettes refused to pay taxes they are usually described as practicing civil disobedience; when they began systematically breaking store windows, they are usually said to have turned to direct action. Of course, by classical anarchist definitions, smashing windows to pressure the government to enact a voting reform is not direct action in any sense at all—it is thoroughly indirect—but the usage demonstrates how much the term has become synonymous with a certain degree of militancy.
All this makes it easy to see why the question of “direct action” has been so often at the center of political debate. During the first half of the twentieth century, for example, there were endless arguments about the role of direct action in the labor movement. Today, it is easy to forget that, when labor unions first appeared, they were seen as extremely radical organizations. They represented, in fact, a kind of claim to revolutionary dual power. To go on strike, to destroy machinery, occupy factories, establish picket lines so as to physically prevent scabs from entering a workplace: all this was a matter of workers seizing for themselves the right to employ coercive force, in direct defiance of the state’s claims of holding a monopoly on violence. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, one of the earliest nineteenth-century anarchist philosophers, and closely attached to the French labor movement of his day, actually opposed strikes because he believed the movement should limit itself only to explicitly nonviolent forms of direct action. Very quickly, though, states that could not completely repress unions set out to co-opt them. Certain forms of industrial action (such as picket lines) were legalized, but strictly regulated; others (such as workplace sabotage) strictly forbidden. As one might imagine, all this sparked lively debate within the syndicalist movement. Georges Sorel captures something of the flavor of these debates in his essay “Reflections on Violence,” published in France in 1908. In it, he argues that even when a strike or labor action really does challenge the state’s monopoly on violence, even if one is dealing with an illegal, wildcat strike, strikes are not really revolutionary because ordinarily, a strike aims to win concessions on wages, hours, or conditions that the state will then guarantee and, ultimately, enforce. One is, therefore, not challenging state violence but trying to enlist it for one’s own side. Sorel argued that from an anarchist point of view, the only genuinely revolutionary strike would be a general strike that aimed to overthrow the system of state violence as a whole. Labor actions therefore were legitimate only insofar as they were attempts to move in that direction, dress rehearsals, perhaps, or forms of agitprop.
In the United States, too, philosophical differences often ended up being fought out largely through arguments about tactics. The early part of the twentieth century saw a profound split between mainstream unions like the Knights of Labor, which eventually came to form the backbone of the AFL-CIO, and revolutionary unions like the IWW (the Industrial Workers of the World, or Wobblies). The latter’s ultimate aim was “the abolition of the wage system,” and they refused to work through the state, which they saw as an illegitimate institution. They were in essence, if not officially, anarcho-syndicalist. Where mainstream unions emphasized higher wages and job security, the Wobblies were—like European anarchist unions—more interested in reducing hours. Still, the main thing they ended up openly arguing about was the Wobbly endorsement of “direct action,” which in this context basically came to mean workplace sabotage.
It’s important to emphasize here that the practice of workplace sabotage was never considered particularly scandalous—at least among workers. The destruction of corporate property, workplace occupations, intentionally shoddy work, slowdowns—all of these have long formed part of the repertoire, the standard tool-kit, one might say, of organized labor for centuries. They remain so to this day. I myself grew up in a building in Manhattan with faulty plumbing because of workplace sabotage tracing back to some labor dispute from the late 1950s. American strikers still regularly puncture tires and even set company equipment on fire. However, none of this is official union policy. Union officials invariably condemn such actions, or else deny they occur. Part of the reason is because they are allowed to strike. Unions are, paradoxically, the only organizations in the US legally permitted to engage in direct action; but they can do so only if they do not call it that; and only at the cost of accepting endless and intricate regulations over how and when they can strike, what kinds of pickets they can set up and where, whether they are allowed to engage in other tactics such as secondary boycotts or even publicity campaigns, and so on. Anything that goes beyond these restrictions tends to be defined as “direct action” and officially disallowed. This is the reason, as we will see, that union leaders invariably do everything in their power to ensure that rank-and-file workers do not participate in direct actions like those in Seattle and Québec City. If union members—in their capacity as union members—had helped pull down the wall in Québec, for example, they would not just have been engaging in illegal activities, they would have been jeopardizing the very basis of their leadership’s special relation with the state.
Those continuing to work within the syndicalist tradition will, unsurprisingly, object to this sort of identification of direct action with mere militancy. They tend to prefer definitions like those with which I began the chapter. A few have gone so far as to argue that large-scale actions like Seattle or Québec were not really direct actions at all, for just this reason. Shortly after the shutdown of the World Trade Organization in Seattle in November 1999, for example, a Norwegian anarcho-syndicalist named Harald Beyer-Arensen wrote an article intending to show that Seattle wasn’t really direct action because it did not involve people acting directly to transform their own immediate situation.
Campaigning for wage-workers to join the Industrial Workers of the World, Eugene V. Debs stated in December 1905: “The capitalists own the tools they do not use, and the workers use the tools they do not own.” To this one could add: At times direct action may mean putting the tools we do not own out of action, at times it may mean bringing them into play for our own, self-defined needs and ends. In the final instance, it can only mean acting as if all the tools were in fact our own (Beyer-Arensen 2000:11).
Once again, direct action means insisting on acting as if one is already free. This is why, he goes on to argue, it lies at the heart of the “anarchist, social revolutionary project”: it is the means by which the working classes can emancipate themselves by their own efforts, rather than the guidance of any sort of revolutionary vanguard or elite.
From this perspective we can define direct action as being an action carried out on the behalf of nobody else but ourselves, where the means are immediately also the ends, or if not, as in a wage strike, not mediated by any union bureaucracy, where the means (decreasing the bosses’ profits by our non-work, and thus also diminishing the bosses’ power) stand in an immediate relationship to self-defined ends (increasing our wages and extending our own power). A direct action successfully carried out brings about a direct rearrangement of existing conditions of life through the combined efforts of those directly affected (ibid.).
What happened at Seattle? A group of activists tried—and, for a while, succeeded—in shutting down a meeting of trade bureaucrats so as to disrupt negotiations on a new WTO round, and to make a public issue out of the very existence of the World Trade Organization. This, Beyer-Arensen is willing to allow, does in certain ways resemble direct action. Certainly, those who created the “Direct Action Network” to coordinate the proceedings believed that’s what they were doing. If one simply applies the criterion of militancy, one might be tempted to agree, because the event did involve a prolonged (if nonviolent) confrontation with the police. But in fact, Beyer-Arensen insists, it was not really direct action, because it was not really “direct.” He provides an example. Imagine a town that suffers from a lack of water. What’s more, some real estate magnate owns all the surrounding land and has the mayor in his pocket, so townsfolk cannot simply build new wells. If one were to assemble a group of townsfolk to dig a new well anyway, in defiance of the law, then that would be direct action. But if one were to have them blockade the mayor’s house until he changed his policy, that would certainly not be. It might be far more militant than writing petitions or letters or lobbying, but it’s just another version of the same thing: an appeal to the powers-that-be to change their behavior. It still recognizes the authority a real direct actionist would reject. Beyer-Arensen concludes that the effort to shut down the WTO meetings in Seattle was not an example of direct action because, ultimately, it was simply an attempt to create a media spectacle that would then “influence the powers-that-be by way of some imagined ‘public opinion’” (200:12). The WTO meetings themselves were, after all, basically ceremonial. Most real decisions are made elsewhere. Therefore, the real purpose of the protests was to provide a kind of counter-ceremony aimed at winning public attention, since its ostensible aims (to shut down the WTO as an institution) could not possibly be accomplished by the means employed. It was essentially an act of propaganda, of guerilla theater, meant to influence government policy.
Beyer-Arensen ends the piece by admitting that any direct action is to a certain degree an act of “propaganda by the deed,” since they are meant to teach through example. The community that defies the law by building its own well is not simply acting for themselves; they are also setting an example of self-organization to other communities. But this is a secondary effect of an otherwise direct action, and anyway, they’re not trying to influence the government.
Now, I’m not citing this argument at such length because I find it particularly persuasive. It represents the opinions of one, older, rather curmudgeonly anarcho-syndicalist and I believe the overwhelming majority of contemporary anarchists would certainly disagree with its conclusions. After all, as Sorel pointed out, one could apply this same logic to the very labor actions Beyer-Arensen approves of: since ultimately strikers are seeking binding arbitration by government mediators and even if they are not, any agreements they make with their employers will end up being enforced by the state. If one takes Beyer-Arensen’s line of argument to its logical conclusion, no action that occurs under a framework of legality, or in which public opinion is a factor, could possibly be considered direct. After all, if one places one’s body in the path of the bulldozer about to destroy one’s home, or a community garden, much though one might like to think what one is doing is simply appealing to the moral conscience of the driver, one cannot realistically deny that the driver is also likely to be thinking about the possibility of being brought up on charges of negligent homicide, or of being written up in the papers the next day as a heartless killer. Beyer-Arensen himself is not entirely unaware of this dilemma—at least in the case of strikes. He ends his essay by suggesting that certain strikes are actually better examples of direct action than others. His favorite example is a strike by transit workers in Melbourne during the 1980s in which, rather than walking off their jobs, bus drivers and train conductors stayed on, but stopped collecting fares—effectively making mass transportation free until the action was over. Imagine, he suggests, what would happen if, for just one day, workers in every branch of industry and service trade did the same. This alone could be a major step in showing how a capitalist economy could be transformed into an economy of freedom.
This is a powerful image, but it bears a remarkable resemblance to acts that Beyer-Arensen would no doubt condemn as pure theater. Take for example a publicity stunt organized by members of the squatter community of Christiana, located on the site of a former army base outside Copenhagen:
In 1974, the community engaged in various forms of street theatre to gain a more favorable public image. “The first Christmas for the poor and lonely was arranged and Solvognen organized an army of Father Christmases who generously handed out presents to both young and old from the city’s department stores. Naturally, they were arrested, but as a consequence, pictures of the Police beating up Father Christmases hit the front pages of the papers worldwide.[12]
In other words, they made almost exactly the same point as the Melbourne strikers, but with hardly any real direct action at all. So then the question becomes: where to draw the line? How direct does it have to be? If providing free goods and services to four or five random kids on the street is not enough to make it real, why should ten thousand commuters, for one day, be any different?
The reason I cited this argument at length is that it provides a window on a certain moral universe. Most American anarchists I know find arguments about whether Seattle was really a direct action a bit silly—at best they might make a mildly diverting topic for discussion over beer, but to take such questions too seriously seems academic, even sectarian. Still, the underlying issues are critical. As we’ll see, most of the objections raised to the idea of border actions in the weeks before Québec City were based on a feeling such actions would be merely symbolic, not genuine direct action. Moreover, the essence of Beyer-Arensen’s critique—that actions like Seattle are largely symbolic, and that the point is to work within real communities in ways that allow people to take power over their own lives—is something anyone involved in the movement would agree with. Even before Naomi Klein (2000) wrote her famous article in the Nation warning activists about the dangers of “summit hopping,” of “following trade bureaucrats as if they were the Grateful Dead,” all this was already a major item of debate. Those who defended actions like Seattle not only insisted that it was a direct intervention, since people put their bodies on the line so as to block delegates from entering the building, but that they did so in just the way that Beyer-Arensen underlines as key: by mobilizing a community of people in a form of self-organization which provides a living alternative to the existing structure of authority.
This was indeed meant as educational. On the one hand, they set out to expose the undemocratic nature of the WTO and similar institutions that, they felt, together formed the backbone of an unaccountable world neoliberal government that sought the power to suppress existing democratic rights in the name of corporate power. On the other hand, they were determined to organize the whole action according to directly democratic principles and thus provide a living example of how genuine egalitarian decision making might work. When dealing with global institutions, this is about as direct as an action can possibly get.
The Direct Action Network, which forms much of the immediate focus of this book, emerged directly from this project. It was meant in part as a way of organizing actions against neoliberal institutions; in part, as a model of consensus-based, decentralized direct democracy. For all its flaws (and we will be learning a good deal about those), it played an important role in doing so.
To sum up, then: direct action represents a certain ideal—in its purest form, probably unattainable. It is a form of action in which means and ends become, effectively, indistinguishable; a way of actively engaging with the world to bring about change, in which the form of the action—or at least, the organization of the action—is itself a model for the change one wishes to bring about. At its most basic, it reflects a very simple anarchist insight: that one cannot create a free society through military discipline, a democratic society by giving orders, or a happy one through joyless self-sacrifice. At its most elaborate, the structure of one’s own act becomes a kind of micro-utopia, a concrete model for one’s vision of a free society. As Emma Goldman (and others) observed, the fact that the authorities define such acts as crimes is not a problem in this regard—insofar as it serves to constantly remind actors to take responsibility for their actions, and behave with courage and integrity, it can be a great advantage. The problems, rather, come when one moves beyond confrontation to other forms of engagement with a world organized along different lines.
A revolutionary strategy based on direct action can only succeed if the principles of direct action become institutionalized. Temporary bubbles of autonomy must gradually turn into permanent, free communities. However, in order to do so, those communities cannot exist in total isolation; neither can they have a purely confrontational relation with everyone around them. They have to have some way to engage with larger economic, social, or political systems that surround them. This is the trickiest question because it has proved extremely difficult for those organized on radically democratic lines to so integrate themselves in any meaningful way in larger structures without having to make endless compromises in their founding principles. For direct action-based groups, even working in alliance with radical NGOs or labor unions has often created what seem like insuperable problems. On a more immediate level, the strategy depends on the dissemination of the model: most anarchists, for example, do not see themselves as a vanguard whose historical role is to “organize” other communities, but rather as one community setting an example others can imitate. The approach—it’s often referred to as “contaminationism”—is premised on the assumption that the experience of freedom is infectious, that anyone who takes part in a direct action is likely to be permanently transformed by the experience, and want more. This is quite often the case, but it begs the question of how to make others aware of the idea in the first place. What participants experience as profound and transformative often looks, from the outside, as peculiar at best—at worst cult-like or insane. This, in turn, raises the issue of the media. But in addressing such strategic questions, I am really moving from speaking just of direct action to the more general question of anarchism.
One reason I started the chapter as I did was because I also wanted to convey something of the flavor of anarchist debate, which has always tended to differ from the more familiar, Marxist style in focusing more on these kind of concrete questions of practice. Many have complained that anarchism lacks high theory. Even those who are considered its founding figures—Godwin, Proudhon, Bakunin, Kropotkin—often seem more pamphleteers and moralists than true philosophers, and the best-known anarchists of more recent times have been more likely to produce witty slogans, wild poetic rants, or science fiction novels than sophisticated political economy or dialectical analysis.[13] There are thousands of Marxist academics but very few Anarchist ones. This is not because anarchism is anti-intellectual so much as because it does not see itself as fundamentally a project of analysis. It is more a moral project.
As I’ve written elsewhere (Graeber 2002, 2004), Marxism has tended to be a theoretical or analytical discourse about revolutionary strategy; anarchism, an ethical discourse about revolutionary practice. The basic principles of anarchism—self-organization, voluntary association, mutual aid, the opposition to all forms of coercive authority—are essentially moral and organizational.
Admittedly, this flies in the face of the popular image of anarchists as bombthrowing crazies opposed to all forms of organization—but, if one examines how this reputation came about, it tends to reinforce my point. The period of roughly 1875 to 1925 marked the peak of a certain phase of anarchist organizing: there were hundreds of anarchist unions, confederations, revolutionary leagues, and so on. There was a spurt, towards the beginning, of calls for the assassination of heads of state (Anderson 2006), it was quite brief and anarchist spokesmen and organized groups quickly withdrew support from this strategy as counterproductive. Nonetheless, following decades saw a continual stream of dramatic assassinations by people calling themselves anarchists. I am not aware of any actual assassin during this particular period who actually was a product of those anarchist organizations, much less were their actions planned or sponsored by them; rather they almost invariably turned out to be isolated individuals with no more ongoing ties to anarchist life than the Unabomber, and usually about a roughly equivalent hold on sanity. It was rather as if the existence of anarchism gave lone gunmen something to call themselves.[14] But the situation created endless moral dilemmas for anarchist writers and lecturers like Peter Kropotkin or Emma Goldman. By what right could an anarchist denounce an individual who kills a tyrant, no matter how disastrous the results for the larger movement? The whole issue was the subject of endless intense moral debate: not only about whether such acts were (or could ever be) legitimate, but about whether it was legitimate for anarchists who did not feel such acts were wise or even legitimate to publicly condemn them. It has always been these kinds of practical, moral questions that have tended to stir anarchist passions: What is direct action? What kind of tactics are beyond the pale and what sort of solidarity do we owe to those who employ them? Or: what is the most democratic way to conduct a meeting? At what point does organization stop being empowering and become stifling and bureaucratic? For analyses of the nature of the commodity form or the mechanics of alienation, most have been content to draw on the written work of Marxist intellectuals (which are usually, themselves, drawn from ideas that originally percolated through a broader worker’s movement in which anarchists were very much involved). Which also means that, for all the bitter and often violent disagreements anarchists have had with Marxists about how to go about making a revolution, there has always been a kind of complementarity here, at least in potentia.[15]
This is why I think it’s deceptive to write the history of anarchism in the same way one would write the history of an intellectual tradition like Marxism. It is not that one cannot tell the story this way if one wants to. Most books on anarchism do. They start with certain founding intellectual figures (Godwin, Stirner, Proudhon, Bakunin), explain the radical ideas they developed, tell the story of the larger movements that eventually came to be inspired by those ideas, and then document the political struggles, wars, revolutions, and projects of social reform which ensued. But if one looks at what those supposed founding figures actually said, one finds most of them did not really see themselves as creating some great new theory. They were more likely to see themselves as giving a name and voice to a certain kind of insurgent common sense, one they assumed to be as old as history. While anarchism, as a movement, tended to be very strongly rooted in mass organizing of the industrial proletariat, anarchists (including those who were themselves industrial workers) also tended to draw inspiration from existing modes of practice, notably on the part of peasants, skilled artisans, or even, to some degree, outlaws, hobos, vagabonds, and others who lived by their wits—in other words, those who were to some degree in control of their own lives and conditions of work, who might be considered, at least to some degree, autonomous elements. One might say, in Marxist terms, that they were people with some experience of non-alienated production. Such people had experience of life outside of state or capitalist bureaucracies, salaries and wage labor; they were aware such relations were not inevitable; quite often, they viewed them as intrinsically immoral. They were often themselves more drawn to anarchism as an explicit political philosophy, and at least in some times and places (Spanish peasants, Swiss watchmakers) formed its mass base—what’s more, those elements of the industrial proletariat that tended to find the most affinity with anarchism were those who were the least removed from other modes of life. Marx himself tended to dismiss the anarchist base as a particularly inauspicious combination of “petty bourgeoisie” and “lumpen proletariat,” and considered the notion that they could in any way stand outside capitalism ridiculous. Capitalism, for Marx, was a totalizing system. It shaped the consciousness of all those who lived under it in the most intimate fashion. The kind of critiques of capitalism one saw in authors like Proudhon or Bakunin, Marx argued, were simply the voice of a petit bourgeois morality, the small-scale merchants and producers railing against the bigger ones. They had nothing to teach revolutionaries. Only the industrial proletariat, who had absolutely no stake in the existing system, could be a genuinely revolutionary class.
Some would no doubt object that this view of Marx’s thought is a bit crude and unnuanced and probably they’d be right. But it represents the view that soon became canonical among those who claimed to speak in the name of Marxism. My purpose here is not to argue the merits of the case but to emphasize the degree to which we have been viewing the entire anarchist project, essentially, through the eyes of its rivals. Even more, that anarchism tends to involve a different relation of theory and practice than what came to be called ‘Marxism’. The latter is—for all the materialist pretensions—profoundly idealist. The history of Marxism is presented to us as a history of great thinkers—there are Leninists, Maoists, Trotskyites, Gramscians, Althusserians—even brutal dictators like Stalin or Enver Hoxha had to pretend to be great philosophers, because the idea was always that one starts with one man’s profound theoretical insight and the political tendency follows from that. Anarchist tendencies, in contrast, never trace back to a single theorist’s insights—we don’t have Proudhonians and Kropotkinites—but Associationalists, Individualists, Syndicalists, and Platformists. In just about every case, divisions are based on a difference of organizational philosophy and revolutionary practice.
How, then, do we think about a political movement in which the practice comes first and theory is essentially, secondary?
It strikes me that it might be helpful, rather than starting from the word “anarchism,” to start from the word “anarchist.” What sorts of people, or ideas or institutions, can this word refer to? Generally speaking, one finds three different ways the term can be employed. First, one can refer to people who endorse an explicit doctrine known as “anarchism” (or sometimes “anarchy”)—or perhaps more precisely, a certain vision of human possibilities. This is more less the conventional definition. Anarchists become the bearers of an intellectual tradition: one whose history can indeed be traced back to founding figures in the nineteenth century, that spread quite rapidly by the turn of the century to the point where anarchist literature was being avidly read in places like China and India well before Marxism or other strains of Western revolutionary thought had made much of an impression (e.g., Dirlik 1991), but over the course of the early twentieth century was largely displaced by it.[16] Any number of prominent figures of the time, from Picasso to Mao, began their political lives as anarchists and ended up Communists. But one can also speak more broadly. It’s certainly not unheard of to hear historians refer to, say, peasant rebels in early China, or religious radicals in medieval Europe as “anarchists”—meaning that they rejected the authority of governments, and believed people would be better off in a world without hierarchies. In this sense, there have always been anarchists, and there is no great intellectual tradition that hasn’t seen the development of anarchist ideas in one form or another. (This is of course why the ideas of nineteenth-century European anarchists could make sense to people in other parts of the world to begin with.) Finally, there is a third sense. When an anthropologist like Evans-Pritchard refers to the Nuer as living in an “ordered anarchy” (1940), or Joanna Overing uses the word to describe the Amazonian Piaroa (1986, 1988), they are not referring to either doctrines or, even, quite, to anti-authoritarian rebelliousness. They are referring primarily to institutions, habits, and practices. That is, there are certain societies characterized by egalitarian forms of organization—whether systems of exchange, forms of decision-making, or simply the accustomed ways of going about everyday life—and this tends to inculcate, and be supported by, a broadly egalitarian ethos. Anarchism, in this sense, is a way of living, or at least, a set of practices.
In other words, one can see “anarchism” either as a vision, as an attitude, or as a set of practices. The distinction between the last two is admittedly somewhat fuzzy. Those who go about their daily lives on an egalitarian basis tend to do so because they feel that is what people ought to do; those who find all forms of hierarchy objectionable will, ordinarily, do their best to find ways to live without it. Still, in the first case, an egalitarian ethos may well remain largely inchoate. In theory, at least, one living in an anarchistic society might be entirely unaware that there is any other way to live; anyway, such a person will probably only develop explicit anti-authoritarian attitudes once she encounters someone with very different assumptions—say, for example, a foreign conqueror. Similarly, those indignant about being pushed around by social superiors will often examine their own ways of dealing with friends and neighbors as evidence that hierarchy is not a natural and inevitable feature of human life. They might very well start valuing the equality of those relations, or even try to deal with such people in more self-consciously egalitarian fashion than they had before. The nineteenth-century Spanish peasants and Swiss watchmakers who found the ideas of Proudhon or Bakunin so amenable—and who Marx denounced as petit bourgeois—were clearly doing exactly that.
What I would like to argue is that “anarchism” is best thought of, not as any one of these things—not as a vision, but neither quite as an attitude or set of practices. It is, rather, best thought of as that very movement back and forth between these three. After all, the experience of foreign conquest or subordination will not necessarily cause once egalitarian communities to reject the very idea of hierarchy, or to become more assiduously egalitarian in their way of dealing with each other: the effect might well be exactly the opposite. It’s when the three reinforce each other—when a revulsion against oppression causes people to try to live their lives in a more self-consciously egalitarian fashion, when they draw on those experiences to produce visions of a more just society, when those visions, in turn, cause them to see existing social arrangements as even more illegitimate and obnoxious—that one can begin to talk about anarchism. Hence anarchism is in no sense a doctrine. It’s a movement, a relationship, a process of purification, inspiration, and experiment. This is its very substance. All that really changed in the nineteenth century is that some people began to give this process a name.
Looking at it this way does make it much easier to understand some things that would otherwise be extremely puzzling. For example: why what passes as anarchist theory often bears so little relation to what the majority of anarchists say and do? If one were to try to understand North American anarchism simply by reading theoretical or ideological statements in the best known and widely distributed explicitly anarchist periodicals, one would end up with the impression that most anarchists were either Primitivists opposed to all forms of technology, even agriculture, or extreme anti-organizationalists, suspicious of any group of more than six or seven people—and that most of the remainder had declared their allegiance to a document called “The Organizational Platform of the General Union of Anarchists” written by Russian émigrés in Paris in 1924. One might also come to the conclusion that the popular impression of anarchists as wild-eyed, impractical nihilists dedicated to rebellion for its own sake was probably not that far from the truth; or, at least, that anarchists seemed to be divided between nihilists and fervent sectarians whose main form of political practice is mutual denunciation. Examining anarchist discussion pages on the Internet would do little to disabuse them of this impression.[17] When I first became involved in anarchist politics, therefore, I was surprised to discover that not only did the overwhelming majority of activists who considered themselves anarchists not identify with any of these positions, many were not even aware of them. Others, who do read the magazines, read them mainly for entertainment value. Elsewhere, I’ve referred to these non-sectarians as “small-a” anarchists, to distinguish them from those who identify with any one particular strain: Green Anarchists, Individualists, Anarcho-Syndicalists, post-Leftists, Platformists, and so on. While statistics are unavailable, Chuck Munson, who occasionally surveys those who frequent [[http://infoshop.com][infoshop.com]—probably the most popular anarchist web site in North America—informs me that about 90% of American anarchists would seem to fit into the small-a category, since only about 10% are willing identify themselves with any particular subset.
What’s more, even many of those who do identify themselves with one particular strain act in ways that would be impossible to understand if we were dealing with a political ideology in anything like the traditional sense of the term. Let me take one example—Primitivism—perhaps the most obviously outré. In America, Primitivist ideas first began to take form in circles surrounding a journal called the Fifth Estate, in Detroit, in the 1970s and 1980s. The argument began as a synthesis of a certain strain of Marxism with ideas first articulated by socialist heretics such as Jacques Ellul and Jacques Camatte, who came to see the nature of technology itself as lying at the core of most of what Marx saw as alienating and oppressive about capital, and thus rejected the idea that the proletariat, as an essential part of the global “megamachine,” could possibly be the agents of a revolution (Millet 2004). As part of a broader critique developing around that time of the productivist bias in traditional leftist thought, it’s hard to see this as anything but perfectly normal debate. By the 1990s, however, the most aggressive strain of Primitivist thought began to coalesce around the figure of John Zerzan, one time ultra-leftist, who began expressing utter hostility not only to “the Left” but to “civilization” itself. Zerzan basically took the most radical position that it was possible to take, arguing that everything from plant domestication to music, writing, math, art, and ultimately, even speech—basically all forms of symbolic representation, anything other than absolute, direct, unmediated experience—were really forms of alienation that could only be overcome through the destruction of civilization in its entirety, and a return to the stone age. Now, the influence of Zerzan on anarchism has been considerably overstated in the media, but, there are a significant number of Green Anarchists who take his ideas very seriously, and these Green Anarchists produce any number of zines and journals that aggressively tout these ideas, engaging in constant vitriolic debates with anyone willing to cast doubt on any aspect of the ultra-Primitivist position.[18]
The idea of a return to the paleolithic—the rejection of plant domestication, let alone language—is obviously absurd. It would require reducing the earth’s population by at least 99.9%. Nor are Primitivists entirely unaware of this: the Fifth Estate people had a long debate about the problem back in the 1970s, the editors coming to the conclusion that, since they didn’t really wish to see a global catastrophe such as a nuclear war, the best one could hope for was a gradual process of negative population growth. Most current Primitivists seem to alternate between openly espousing industrial and demographic collapse—I have heard some argue that humankind is a virus which needs to be largely eradicated—to, in defiance of all logic and common sense, denying that massive population decline would even be necessary (Zerzan often does this before non-anarchist audiences). At the same time, these same authors will regularly denounce anyone who advocates the classic anarchist strategy of “building a new society in the shell of the old.” They ridicule any talk of the slow, painful creation of new institutions as outmoded “Leftism,” arguing that only the complete destruction of all existing structures and institutions, followed by a return to our instinctual “wildness,” could possibly bring about real liberation.
My purpose here is not to critique the Primitivist position: this is obviously pointless. It clearly makes no sense to attack any strategy other than waiting for catastrophe, and then deny one is advocating catastrophe. My real point is: if this were a classic ideological position, one should expect the effects to be utterly de-politicizing. If one were really looking forward to industrial collapse or some similar apocalypse, the most obvious course of action would be that followed by right-wing survivalists in the 1980s: take to the woods, dig a bunker, and begin stockpiling canned food and automatic weapons. Or, alternately, perhaps, find a distant island and try to begin reviving stone-age technologies. To my knowledge no proponent of Green Anarchism has ever done anything of either sort. Instead, they tend to act very much like any other anarchist. Primitivists may be more likely to become involved in ecological or animal rights campaigns than in, say, union-organizing, but in New York, for instance, I know ardent Green Anarchists who’ve worked with the Independent Media Center, in DAN, in video collectives, Food Not Bombs chapters, community gardens, prisoner-support networks, feminist groups, bicycle campaigns, squats, cooperative bookstores, anti-war campaigns, campaigns for the rights of immigrants, housing rights, copwatch programs, and pretty much every other major manifestation of anarchist organizing. Often, in fact, Primitivists turn out to be amongst the most reliable and dedicated activists around.
Confronted with this sort of contradiction, it’s hard to avoid asking the same question Evans-Pritchard asked about Zande witchcraft: “how can otherwise reasonable people claim to believe this sort of thing?” If one points out some of these contradictions to actual advocates of Primitivism—for instance, asking them to reflect on what would actually happen if the population of, say, Bangladesh were to one day decide to stop practicing agriculture—the usual reply will be “but it’s not a program! It’s a critique.” Alternately, they might challenge the very logical pragmatic terms of the argument, and insists these are poetic, intuitive understandings about the state of a world that is fundamentally dislocated and wrong. Similarly, even the most avid fans of Zerzan will usually admit, if pressed, that they aren’t really in favor of the abolition of language, but instead emphasize the degree to which language can be deceptive, ideological, or mask and occlude more direct forms of experience.
All this, I think, does much to explain the appeal, and the reason Primitivism tends towards such absolutes. It is really an attempt to take absolutely seriously those feelings of utter alienation that drive so many middle-class, white teenagers to anarchism in the first place, and to at least try to imagine a world in which every aspect of that alienation would be totally extinguished. The result can only be a kind of myth. Primitivists will often admit this too, claiming that widespread myths of apocalypse, and of the garden of Eden, are intuitive understandings of real truths: that we once did live in a kind of paradise, that we lost it, and that through a catastrophic collapse of industrial society, we will get it back again. The myth of apocalypse comes to substitute for the faith in revolution. It is, in a way, the same thing, except more absolute: the traditional anarchist rejection of political representation becomes a rejection of representation in any form, even art or language. For most Primitivists, this is what we are mainly dealing with: a comprehensive critique of alienating institutions, and a kind of impossible dreamvision of total liberation that can, if nothing else, provide inspiration and continually remind one why one is in rebellion to begin with. For many, the fact that this makes no sense whatsoever to outsiders is probably a major element in its appeal.
Let me take an apparently very different example. One of the main forms for the dissemination of anarchist ideas in recent years in America have been feminist science fiction novels: from Ursula LeGuin’s The Dispossessed (1974) to Starhawk’s The Fifth Sacred Thing (1993). They operate in a similar way. They are crystallizations of certain tendencies of thought, extrapolations from certain forms of practice, experiments in utopian imagining. The main difference is that since the visions developed in novels are not claiming to be anything but fiction, those who enjoy reading (or writing) them do not tend to claim alternative visions are wrong. In the case of Green Anarchism, the vitriolic quality of so much of the writing seems to result from the confluence of two factors. On the one hand, the urgency of the ecological cause, the sense that the planet is being destroyed and we are all doomed anyway if something isn’t done very quickly, and a certain habit of extremely contentious argument inherited from the sectarian Marxist origins of so many of the original participants.[19]
In this, they are unusual. As I mentioned, anarchists have long tended to shun high theory. As David Wieck put it back in 1971 (long before anyone had thought of the term ‘postmodernism’):
Anarchism has always been anti-ideological: anarchists have always insisted on the priority of life and action to theory and system. Subjection to a theory implies, in practice, subjection to an authority (a party) which interprets the theory authoritatively, and this subjection would fatally undermine the intention of creating a society without central political authority. Thus no anarchist writings are authoritative or definitive in the sense that Marx’s writings have been regarded by his followers (1971: ix).
In fact, most of what serves the same role as theory in anarchism makes some gesture to subvert any possibility of its being used as an authoritative text. Primitivism perhaps most closely resembles a traditional sectarian ideology in trying to vanquish all opposing positions, but its content is palpably fantastic and for the most part could not possibly be reflected in practice. Some visions take the form of novels. Others read like comedy routines. One of the more popular anarchist authors of the 1990s—the inventor, for instance, of the concept of the “Temporary Autonomous Zone”—writes under the persona of Hakim Bey, an insane Ismaili poet with an erotic obsession with young boys, his writings taking the form of communiqués from a non-existent Moorish Orthodox Church.
Bey’s mystical pretensions typify another tendency: to identify the space that might otherwise be filled by theory, the transcendental position, as it were, with the sacred, but then to make the sacred ridiculous. I’ll be talking about this habit later on when I discuss the role of giant puppets—what might be called the main sacred objects of the movement (but also self-consciously foolish ones). Here, suffice it to say that the relation of anarchism to spirituality has always been complex and ambivalent. In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, European anarchism always tended to be strongest in countries—Russia, Spain, Italy—with a powerful church, and tended to take on a radically atheist tone, identifying the very notion of God with the principle of hierarchy and unquestioning authority. (So Bakunin’s famous phrase “if God really existed, it would be necessary to abolish him.” There were exceptions—Christian anarchists like Tolstoy—but they were usually not closely related to social movements.) Some have argued that Spanish anarchism, particularly in its rural manifestations, itself took on some of the qualities of a prophetic, millenarian religion (Brenan 1943; cf. Borkenau 1937)—but, if so, it was one whose main rituals involved acts like burning churches, or removing the mummified bodies of nuns from church crypts to reveal the corruption lurking below (Lincoln 1991). In contemporary anarchism this hostility has largely faded away: in part because in many countries, the church has lost so much of its power; in part because so many anarchist allies (indigenous peoples, for example, or in the United States, Quakers, radical priests and ministers) are likely to have come to their politics through religious convictions; in part, too, because of the development of specifically anarchistic forms of spirituality such as feminist paganism. At the same time, specifically anarchist forms of spirituality are—in addition to being inherently pluralistic and open-ended (hence the polytheism)—almost always at least a trifle self-effacing and capable of distance from themselves.[20] Many pagans have a striking ability to see their views as profoundly true, and simultaneously, as a kind of whimsical comedy. Often they seem to be engaging at the same time in a ritual and the parody of a ritual; the point where laughter and self-mockery are likeliest to come into the picture is precisely the point where one approaches the most numinous, unknowable, or profound. The same whimsical, playful quality is reflected in a good deal of pagan feminist literature, as in other branches of anarchist theory, and appears to reflect a sensibility that, at its best, sees “theory” as, if anything, a form of creative writing, both profoundly true because it highlights certain otherwise invisible aspects of reality, but at the same time profoundly foolish, in that it does so by being willingly blind to other aspects.[21] Also, one in which imagination, the ability to create new theories, visions, or anything else, is itself the ultimate, unknowable, sacred thing.
All this is perhaps a bit overstated: the reader should probably not take my own theoretical effusions too much more seriously than those about which I’m writing. The main point, though, is that—unlike some of the “classical” works of Proudhon, Kropotkin, Rocker, Malatesta, De Santillan, and others, written in the shadow of Marxism—contemporary anarchist “theory,” such as it is, is most explicitly not intended to provide a comprehensive understanding that will instruct others in the proper conduct of revolution. It is not an ideology, a theory of history. It tends, rather, towards a kind of inspirational, creative play. It is more than anything else an extrapolation from and imaginative projection of certain forms of practice: the experience of working in a small affinity group becomes the model for Primitivist idealizations of the hunter/gatherer band, assumed to be the only social unit for most of human history; the experience of real experiments in worker control becomes the basis for an imaginary planet in a science fiction story; the experience of sisterhood becomes the model for a matriarchal Goddess religion; the experience of a wild moment of collective poetic inspiration or even a particularly good party becomes the basis of a theory of the Temporary Autonomous Zone. Even when contemporary anarchists turn to Marxism, their overwhelming favorite theorists are the Situationists Raoul Vaneigem (1967) and Guy Debord (1967) the Marxist theorists closest to the avant-garde tradition of trying to unify theory, art, and life.
If anarchism is not an attempt to put a certain sort of theoretical vision into practice, but is instead a constant mutual exchange between inspirational visions, anti-authoritarian attitudes, and egalitarian practices, it’s easy to see how ethnography could become such an appropriate tool for its analysis. This is precisely what ethnography is supposed to do: tease out the implicit logic in a way of life, along with its related myths and rituals, to grasp the sense of a set of practices. Of course, another way of doing so would be simply to follow anarchist debates, as I did at the beginning, since these have tended to center on ethical and organizational questions. Nowadays, these debates center most of all on how to combat racism and sexism in the movement, about forms of decision-making, and questions of violence and nonviolence. Since the last is most immediately relevant to the question of the relation of anarchism and direct action, let me proceed to a brief consideration of the relation between the two, before moving to a capsule history of the role of direct action and direct democracy in North American social movements in the second half of the twentieth century—starting with the 1960s, and ending in the 1990s, at the point where the two began to definitively merge.
The question of violence, nonviolence, and property destruction has haunted anarchism from at least the nineteenth century.
There are obvious reasons why it should be a problem. On the one hand, there are any number of reasons why anarchists might be suspicious of violence. For one thing, anarchists start from the principle that one’s mode of resistance should embody the world one wishes to create. Almost no one wishes to create a more violent world. Anarchists try to organize on non-hierarchical lines, and argue that this is not only more just, but more efficient. Violence—particularly aggressive violence—is one of the few forms of human activity that does seem to be more efficient if organized on a top-down, command basis. This, and the concomitant need for secrecy, ensure that the more one prepares for war, or something like it, the more difficult it is to organize democratically.
On the other hand, anarchists wish to see a social revolution and it’s hard to imagine how that could happen without any violent conflict whatsoever.
Moreover, they also insist on the moral sovereignty of the individual, and tend to be very uncomfortable with codes of conduct. In principle, it should be for each who resists to decide what is a legitimate act of resistance to an intrinsically illegitimate power. Now, it’s important not to overstate things here: in practice, tacit agreements do always exist. CLAC’s principle of “diversity of tactics,” about which we heard so much in earlier chapters, might have sounded like “anything goes” to pacifists like SalAMI, but it was premised on a shared understanding that no one was about to show up with firearms or explosives. That would have been simply unthinkable. If my experience is anything to go by, if anyone had even suggested doing so, they would immediately have been assumed to be a police infiltrator for that very reason. Nonetheless, such tacit understandings exist only amongst activists. If outsiders join in, one can never be quite sure what they are going to do. In Québec, for instance, there was a scare-story going around the Black Bloc at one point during the actions that “French gangbangers” were going to show up at the wall with firearms (an act which they assumed would be automatically blamed on them). In Seattle, the Black Bloc’s carefully targeted destruction of corporate targets was, in a few cases, followed by episodes of opportunistic looting by local African-American teenagers. In that case, it’s unlikely any in the Bloc objected. To see oppressed communities rise up and join you is, in a way, the whole point. And, as in St. Jean Baptiste, that oppressed community’s standards for acceptable tactics might well be different than your own. However, most large mobilizations (including Québec City) also see at least a few minor episodes of what I call “the drunken frat boy problem”—opportunistic violence, mainly for the fun of it, on the part of young people whose politics are likely to have nothing to do with the activists’, or even be explicitly right wing. In Europe, this can actually be encouraged by police, providing an excuse for repressive measures. The most extreme example of this came in Genoa, when police apparently let it be known they would turn a blind eye to this sort of thing, and fascists and soccer hooligans from all over Europe descended on the place.
Still, Genoa was extreme and this is usually a fairly minor problem. The worst moral dilemma for anarchists tends to come when isolated individuals, claiming anarchist inspiration, do something genuinely violent. Again, the anarchists who assassinated heads of state around the turn of the last century are probably the most dramatic example. The fascinating thing about such cases is that the majority of such assassinations were conducted by isolated individuals, not people active in actual anarchist organizations. Many had only the vaguest idea what anarchist principles were. However, if one takes the principle of moral autonomy seriously, it’s difficult to treat such acts as completely illegitimate. From an anarchist perspective, insofar as it is legitimate to engage in any act of interpersonal violence, heads of state, major capitalists, or high officials are clearly the most legitimate targets. To instead adopt a more conventional guerilla war strategy, form a small army and attack police stations or army posts—thus trying to kill a bunch of ordinary people who are in no sense directly responsible for the policies one objected to—would clearly be far more problematic. (Actually, it’s hard to deny that, by any moral standards, assassination is far superior to war.) On the other hand, since heads of state tend to find this kind of logic highly objectionable, the results are invariably disastrous. Anarchist writers like Peter Kropotkin or Emma Goldman, mainly concerned with disseminating anarchist ideas before a broader public, often struggled painfully with what to do or say about such people. Is it legitimate to condemn them? What sort of solidarity does one owe them? Does one not at least have the responsibility to explain to the world their point of view? Debates over broken windows and property destruction, or the possibility of molotovs in Québec City, are simply more recent versions of the same thing.
Activists who have been on the scene even only as long as two or three years tend to complain about the need to constantly reinvent the wheel in such matters. Every time there’s a major action, everyone has to go through exactly the same debates. Some will argue that confrontational tactics or property destruction will only make activists look bad in the eyes of the public. Others will argue that the corporate media wouldn’t make us look good whatever we do. Some will argue that if you smash a Starbucks window, that will be the only story on the news, effectively freezing out any consideration of issues; others will reply that if there’s no property destruction, there won’t be any story at all. Some will claim confrontational tactics deprive activists of the moral high ground; others will accuse those people of being elitist, and insist that the violence of the system is so overwhelming that to refuse to confront it effectively is itself acquiescence to violence. Some will argue that militant tactics endanger nonviolent protesters; others will insist that unless one creates some sort of peace police to physically threaten anyone who spraypaints or breaks a window, some will probably do so, and if so, coordinating with the militants rather than isolating them is much safer for all concerned. In the end, one almost invariably ends up with the same resolution: that as long as no one is actually attacking another human being, the important thing is to maintain solidarity. The last thing you want is to end up in a situation like Seattle, where you actually had pacifists physically assaulting anarchists trying to break windows, or turning them in to the police. Many remark that the conclusion is so inevitable that one wishes it was possible to simply fast-forward the debate, but, as many will resignedly remark, it seems each time a major action rolls along, those newly brought into the movement have to work all these things out for themselves.
One result though is a kind of constant paradox within anarchism. It’s not that one cannot find pacifist anarchists. Quite a number of pacifists do see themselves as anarchists. Those contemporary anarchists who are not pacifists, however, tend to avoid any association with pacifism, and in fact are likely to react to mention of the word with vigorous condemnation—despite the fact that, in the larger perspective, their ideas and practices emerged much more from that tradition than from any other. One would be hard-pressed to find an anarchist whose instinct would not be to place himself more on the side of Malcolm X than with Martin Luther King or Gandhi; however, the fact remains that in terms of overall approach, Gandhi’s “become the change you want to see” seems a thousand times more in keeping with the anarchist spirit than Malcolm X’s “by all means necessary”—and Gandhi himself recognized a strong philosophical affinity of his own ideas and anarchism, which Malcolm X certainly did not. “By all means necessary,” in fact, seems an awful lot like the very ends-justifies-the-means logic which anarchism has consistently rejected. Yet practical annoyances with pacifists, combined with the inevitable instinct to identify with the most radical option, tends to ensure that almost invariably, the anarchist will nonetheless identify with Malcolm X.
Most anarchists nowadays, for example, are fond of citing arguments like Native American activist Ward Churchill’s Pacifism as Pathology (1998), that pacifism itself is mainly a way for white liberals to feel good about themselves, that genuinely oppressed groups do not have such luxuries, and that apparent exceptions—the victories of Gandhi or King—were really only made possible by their opponent’s fear of more violent alternatives. (The fact that authors like Churchill also tend to reject anarchist critiques of hierarchy in favor of military-style leadership tends to go unremarked, or written off as inessential.)[22] The fact that Churchill is Native American, however, is significant. In fact, very few North American anarchists would themselves go far beyond breaking a window; almost all scrupulously avoid harming others in any way. As I occasionally point out to journalists, it’s hard not to find constant references to Black Bloc anarchists as “violent” amusing when one has spent any time with them, and observes them, for instance, carefully avoiding stepping on worms or debating about whether it’s really justifiable to kill a mosquito. The real point of fracture comes, precisely, when it comes to issues of solidarity. To take a consistently nonviolent position, one would have to, for example, tell the Zapatistas in Chiapas that they shouldn’t really have conducted an armed insurrection—however brief—or the Black Panthers that a bunch of middle-class white anarchists had more authority to tell them what sort of tactics to employ than they did. This dichotomy—between community-building (in which anarchists have everything in common with pacifists) and solidarity with oppressed groups—is a constant dilemma that will come up throughout this book.
It is interesting to observe that historically, anarchism has thrived as a revolutionary movement most of all in times of peace, and in largely demilitarized societies. As Eric Hobsbawm has noted (1973:61), during the latter years of the nineteenth century, when most Marxist parties were rapidly becoming reformist social democrats, it was anarchism that stood at the center of the revolutionary Left.[23] Things only really changed with World War I and, of course, after the Russian revolution. The conventional historiography assumes it was the creation of the Soviet Union that led to the decline of anarchism and catapulted Communism everywhere to the fore. Still, it seems to me one could look at this another way. In the late nineteenth century most people honestly believed that war between industrialized powers was becoming obsolete. By 1900, even the use of passports was considered an antiquated barbarism. While colonial adventures were always a constant, a war between, say, England and France seemed about as unthinkable as it would today. The “short twentieth century” (which appears to have begun in 1914 and ended sometime around 1989 or 1991) was, by contrast, probably the most violent in human history. It was a century in which major powers were continually preoccupied with either waging world wars or preparing for them. Hardly surprising, then, that anarchism might come to seem unrealistic. The creation and maintenance of huge mechanized killing machines does seem to be the one thing that anarchists can never, by definition, be very good at. Neither is it surprising that Marxist parties (already organized on a command structure, and for whom the organization of huge mechanized killing machines often proved about the only thing they were particularly good at) began to seem eminently practical and realistic in comparison. It makes perfect sense, then, that the moment the Cold War ended and violent conflict between industrialized powers again came to seem unthinkable, anarchism popped right back to where it had been at the end of the nineteenth century: an international movement at the very center of the revolutionary left. The surprising thing was that it happened almost instantly.
What’s more, one could make a case that the effectiveness of more militant anarchist tactics tend to depend on the effective demilitarization of society. Consider here the battles over squats in Germany or Italy, or even the battles surrounding the expansion of Narita airport in Japan, in which anarchists or their local equivalents were able to fight pitched battles with police, defend territory with clubs and stones against tear gas and water cannons, and as often as not, were actually allowed to win. It’s hard to think of anything remotely like this happening in the United States. In America, the police simply will not allow themselves to lose. If they decide to move in on a squat in force, that squat will be lost; the only reason to defend it is to make the police’s job so difficult that they will hesitate before attacking other squats in the future. It’s not just because American society is far more heavily policed; it’s also because Germany, Italy, and Japan—all, significantly, former Axis powers—have been so effectively demilitarized. Stand-up battles with the police are only possible in societies in which everyone, including the public, is aware that almost no one owns firearms, and therefore, police tactics appropriate to a society where most criminals can be assumed to be heavily armed—for example SWAT teams—seem wildly inappropriate. And certainly, in those parts of Europe where firearms and military knowhow is much more broadly available (one thinks of Russia, Albania, the former Yugoslavia, or for that matter Iraq) classical anarchism and anarchist tactics do not find nearly as fertile ground.
Curiously, the real inspiration for the kind of tactics employed in the current wave of globalization protests comes from movements in parts of the Global South which had not, until recently, really been able to engage in nonviolent direct action at all. People’s Global Action, which put out the call for Seattle, was founded on the initiative of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) in Chiapas. The Zapatista movement, it seems to me, can best be seen as an attempt by people who have historically been denied the right to nonviolent, civil resistance to seize it; essentially, to call the bluff of neoliberalism and its pretenses to democratization and yielding power to “civil society.” It is, as its commanders say, an army that aspires not to be an army any more. Since their initial, three-week insurrection in January 1994, it has also become about the least violent “army” imaginable (it’s something of an open secret that, for the last five years at least, they have not even been carrying real guns). The EZLN is the sort of army that organizes “invasions” of Mexican military bases in which hundreds of rebels sweep in entirely unarmed to scream at and try to shame the resident soldiers. The other two key founding members of PGA were the KRRS, a Gandhian peasant movement in India, and the MST, or Landless Peasants Movement, in Brazil. The latter have gained an enormous moral authority in Brazil by nonviolent mass actions aimed at reoccupying unused lands entirely nonviolently. As with the Zapatistas, it’s pretty clear that, if the same people had tried the same thing twenty years ago, they would simply have been mowed down. The most radical movements in South America today, in fact, tend to be about as nonviolent as they think they can get away with: most will, like the militants in Québec City, limit themselves to throwing rocks, and then normally against fully armored riot police, but would never dream of using firearms. The situation is complicated because in many parts of Latin America there is, and has long been, a much richer tradition of nonviolent direct action than in either Europe or North America, but the globalization movement’s immediate inspiration seems to come primarily from groups that, twenty or thirty years ago, would almost certainly have been forced to resort to guerilla warfare, but who, having watched so many earlier guerilla movements destroy themselves, or degenerate into nihilist gangsters, have chosen instead to take a radically different approach. In moving away from military tactics they often also ended up—often rather despite themselves—moving towards much more anarchistic forms of organization.
Before World War II, the main locus of direct action in North America was as I mentioned the labor movement. The period since the war has seen a gradual merging of the traditions of direct action and of direct democracy, with the two only really coming together in the late 1970s and early 1980s, ready to be revived by the influence of the Zapatistas. The story is very complicated but a caricature version might run something like this:
The 1960s New Left kicked off with a call for “participatory democracy” in the famous Port Huron Statement of 1962, a founding document of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). Its principle author, Tom Hayden, was inspired ultimately by John Dewey and C. Wright Mills and the document was notable for calling for a broad democratization of all aspects of American society, to create a situation where people are making for themselves the “decisions that affect their lives.”[24] One might see this as a very anarchistic vision, but SDS, as its inception, had a very different orientation. Actually, their original political program was to radicalize the Democratic Party (they only abandoned it when placed in an impossible position by the Democrats’ continual pursuit of the Vietnam War). Even more crucially, those who framed the statement seemed to have only the sketchiest ideas of what “participatory democracy” might mean in practice. This is most evident in the contradictory character of SDS’s own structure. As Francesca Polletta (2002) has pointed out, SDS was on paper a quite formal, top-down organization, with a central steering committee and meetings run according to Robert’s Rules of Order. In practice, it was made up of largely autonomous cells that operated by a kind of crude, de facto consensus process. The emphasis on consensus, in turn, appears to have been inspired by the example of SNCC, the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, the student wing of the civil rights movement. SNCC had originally been created on the initiative of Anita Baker and a number of other activists who had been involved in the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), who were hoping to create an alternative to SCLC’s top-down structure and charismatic leadership (embodied, of course, in the figure of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.). Famous for organizing lunch-table sit-ins, freedom rides, and other direct actions, SNCC was organized on a thoroughly decentralized basis, with ideas for new projects expected to emerge from individual chapters, all of which operated by a kind of rough-and-ready consensus.
This emphasis on consensus is a bit surprising, since at the time there was very little model for it. In both SNCC and SDS, it appears to have emerged from a feeling that, since no one should be expected to do anything against their will, decisions should really be unanimous. However, there doesn’t seem to have been anything like what’s now called “consensus process” in the formal sense of the term. The problem was there was no obvious model. The only communities in North America with a living tradition of consensus decision-making (the Quakers, and various Native American groups) were either unknown, unavailable, or uninterested in proselytizing. Quakers at the time tended to see consensus essentially as a religious practice; they were, according to Polletta (2002:195), actually fairly resistant to the idea of teaching it to anyone else.
The New Left was, as we all know, essentially a campus movement. Paul Mattick Jr. (1970) has argued that the wave of 1960s activism seems to have emerged from a kind of social bottleneck. The welfare state ideal of the time had been to defuse class tensions by offering a specter of perpetual social mobility (in much the same way the frontier had once done). After the war, there was a very conscious effort on the part of the government to pump resources into the higher education system, which began to expand exponentially, along with the number of working-class children attending university. The problem, of course, is that such growth curves invariably hit their limits, and, as any Third World government that has attempted this strategy has learned, when they do, the results are typically explosive. By the 1960s, this was starting to happen. Millions of students were left without any realistic prospect of finding jobs that bore any relation to their real expectations or capacities—a normal prospect in industrial societies, actually, but suddenly hugely exacerbated. These were the students who first became involved in SDS; people who, as Mattick emphasizes, like their equivalents in the Global South, always saw themselves as a kind of breakaway fragment of the administrative elite. This was, he suggests, crucial to understanding the limits of the New Left—that activists invariably saw themselves as “organizers,” social workers:[25]
What united all factions of the left was the conception of their relationship to actual or fantasized communities as organizers—after the example of trade unionists and social workers—rather than as “fellow students” or workers with a particular understanding of a situation shared with others, and ideas of what to do about it. Despite the disagreement over the primary target for organizing—unemployed, blue-collar workers, white-collar workers, dropout youth—in each case the “community” was seen as a potential “constituency” (or, in PL’s [Progressive Labor Party] language, “base”). The radicals saw themselves as professional revolutionaries, a force so to speak outside of society, organising those inside on their own behalf. Thus the activist played the part reserved in liberal theory for the state, a point not to be neglected in the attempt to understand the drift of the New Left from an orientation of liberal governmental reform to Leninist-Stalinist concepts of socialism (Mattick 1970: 22).
The contradictions of this situation eventually became apparent as the decade wore on. The crisis was sparked first in groups like SNCC, when demands for civil rights began to give way to calls for Black Power. The radicals in SNCC, who were eventually to found the Black Panthers, called on white activists to stop doing alliance work and return to their own communities, particularly, in order to organize white communities against racism. SDS activists always greeted such calls with great ambivalence (Barber 2001)—in part because they were never quite clear on what their own communities were supposed to be. One could say something along these lines had been attempted in the early 1960s with the Economic Research Areas Project (ERAP), intended as the white equivalent to grassroots civil rights organizing, that brought SDS activists into poor white communities, and tried to mobilize communities around matters of common concern. Some of these projects scored victories in gaining local reforms, but organizers never felt much part of the communities in which they worked, felt isolated from other activists, and few saw the results as worth the sacrifice. The project fell apart in 1965. Instead, as Mattick so keenly observed, many began to realize that if there was a way to overcome the alienation of dead-end jobs, to find work that actually lived up to their imaginative capacities, it was in activism itself. Other activists, in effect, were their communities.
The crisis initiated by Black Power ultimately led in two very different directions. Again, at the cost of gross simplification: once their allies in the civil rights movement had abandoned them, white activists were effectively left with two options. They could either try to build countercultural institutions of their own, or they could focus on allying with communities or revolutionary groups in struggle overseas: i.e., the Viet Cong or other Third World revolutionaries, who would take pretty much whatever allies they could get. As SDS began to splinter into squabbling Maoist factions, groups like the Diggers and Yippies (founded in 1968) took the first option. Many were explicitly anarchist, and certainly, the late 1960s turn towards the creation of autonomous collectives and institutionbuilding was squarely within the anarchist tradition, while the emphasis on free love, psychedelic drugs, and the creation of alternative forms of pleasure was squarely in the bohemian tradition with which Euro-American anarchism has always been at least somewhat aligned. The Yippie slogan, “revolution for the hell of it” could be seen as emerging directly from the realization that activism itself could become the prime means of overcoming alienation. The other option was to see oneself as primarily allying with revolutionary communities overseas: hence the obsession with glorifying revolutionary heroes in Cuba, Vietnam, China, and elsewhere (men who, as Situationist and Autonomist critics pointed out, were essentially icons of the sort of new radical administration elites with which the SDS had always tacitly identified), and the feeling one need strike back against the empire from within the belly of the beast.
Each strategy involved a return to direct action, but, simultaneously, a jettisoning of the whole project of creating egalitarian decision-making structures. Hippies and Yippies might be considered a bit ambivalent in this regard, as small communes and many alternative institutions created in the process generally did operate on democratic principles. Still, the Yippies, with their wild, acid-inspired pranks and media stunts, tended to turn into a platform for charismatic impresarios like Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin, in a style that proved notoriously alienating to some members of the white working classes. The Weathermen, in turn, attempted a series of bombings directed at military and corporate targets, meant to inspire spontaneous emulation and drive society towards a revolutionary confrontation—though with the significant limitation that they did not want to kill anyone. They ended up mainly blowing up empty buildings. Interestingly, both had a profound effect on later media policy, since mainstream journalists began to feel complicit, coming to the conclusion that increasingly wild and destructive acts were in fact inspired by a need to constantly escalate in order to make headlines. I have heard persistent rumors from 1960s veterans, for example, that the Weathermen’s bombing campaign was far more extensive and devastating than has ever been recorded, but that there was a conscious decision by the national media to stop reporting on it. I have no idea if this is true. Still, one thing that is clear is that, since this period, the American media has become, more than that of any other industrial democracy I’m aware of, extremely reluctant to report on activist stunts of any sort—or even demonstrations.
This point will become important later on. For now, though, the key point is that none of these groups combined their interest in direct action with an emphasis on decentralized decision-making; to the contrary, whether because the focus turned on the one hand to charismatic figures who were at least potential media stars, or to the kind of cell-like, military structure able to carry out guerilla-style attacks, the impulse was in the other direction. Moreover, both strategies flared up for a few years and very rapidly faded away (though the alternative institutions created around this time often lasted considerably longer).
It has become a conventional habit in liberal scholarship to contrast the serious activism of the early 1960s New Left with the supposed childish extremism of the late 1960s and early 1970s. I don’t want to leave the reader with the impression I agree with this. The standard liberal complaint is that the 1960s counterculture—in effect, the first mass-based, industrial bohemianism—destroyed itself in ultra-radicalism. Moreover, in doing so, the argument goes, it left an opening for right-wing activists to adopt many of the same grassroots organizing techniques developed by SDS to reach out to the very white working-class constituencies SDS had such a difficult time organizing, to mobilize them against that very counterculture. There’s certainly an irony here. But it seems to me it is better to see both periods as attempts to work through certain fundamental dilemmas that are still with us today. I myself suspect the real culprit in the rise and eventual hegemony of the New Right is not the excesses of Maoists and Yippies, but, rather, the fact that America stopped using higher education as a means of class mobility. As most of Mattick’s frustrated administrative classes were reabsorbed into a new, more flexible capitalism, the white working class was increasingly locked out of any access to the means of cultural production—other than, perhaps, their church. The result was a perhaps predictable resentment against the supposed countercultural excesses of the “liberal elite.”[26]
Be this as it may, the second period was far more complex and creative than critics are usually willing to let on. Many of the ideas that came out of it were extraordinarily prescient. Consider, for example, Huey Newton’s notion of “intercommunality,” which became the official Black Panther position in 1971, and which held that the nation-state was in the process of breaking down as the main stage of political struggle and that any effective revolutionary politics would have to begin by an alliance between local self-organized communities irrespective of national boundaries. The real problem was how they were self-organized: the Black Panthers, as typified by figures like Newton himself, eventually came to embody an era in which macho, chauvinist leadership styles themselves came to seem synonymous with militancy.
It’s probably significant that in SNCC, the first move towards rejecting decentralized decision-making was initiated by the emerging Black Power faction. Poletta’s (2002) careful analysis of the organizational history of the movement shows quite clearly that consensus and decentralization were not challenged because they were actually inefficient. Rather, they were used as wedge issues. By obsessing about democratic process, white activists in SNCC and their allies could be identified with endless talk and fussing about; the more militant, Black Power faction could present itself as the ideal model of the ruthless efficiency appropriate to a truly militant organization. It’s probably also significant that Stokely Carmichael, who became the main spokesman for the Black Power position, was fond of saying things like “the only position for women in SNCC is prone.”
The fact that, even by the mid 1960s, such things could be said in an organization that was originally founded by a woman as a revolt against charismatic male authority is itself astounding. But it might give a sense of the sexual politics always lying not far below the surface of the old New Left. Militant nationalist movements are of course notorious for providing platforms for the vigorous reassertion of certain types of masculine authority. But sentiments similar to Carmichael’s can be found coming from the mouths of white activists of that time as well. The feminist movement, in fact, began largely from within the New Left, as a reaction to precisely this sort of macho leadership style—or simply among those tired of discovering that, even during university occupations, they were still expected to prepare sandwiches and provide free sexual services while male activists posed for the cameras. The revival of interest in creating practical forms of direct democracy, in turn—in fact, the real origin of the current movement—thus trace back less to these male 1960s radicals than to the women’s movement that arose largely in reaction to them (for example, Freeman 1971, Evans 1979).
When the feminist movement began, it was organizationally very simple. Its basic units were small consciousness-raising circles; the approach was informal, intimate, and anti-ideological. Most of the first groups emerged directly from New Left circles. Insofar as they placed themselves in relation to a previous radical tradition, it was usually anarchism. While the informal organization proved extremely well suited for consciousness-raising, as groups turned to planning actions, and particularly as they grew larger, problems tended to develop. Almost invariably, such groups came to be dominated by an “inner circle” of women who were, or had become, close friends. The nature of the inner circle would vary, but somehow one would always emerge. As a result, in some groups lesbians would end up feeling excluded, in others the same thing would happen to straight women. Other groups would grow rapidly in size and then see most of the newcomers quickly drop out again as there was no way to integrate them. Endless debates ensued. One result was an essay called “The Tyranny of Structurelessness,” written by Mary Jo Freeman in 1970 and first published in 1972—a text still avidly read by organizers of all sorts in the present day. Freeman’s argument is fairly simple. No matter how sincere one’s dedication to egalitarian principles, the fact is that in any activist group, different members will have different skills, abilities, experience, personal qualities, and levels of dedication. As a result, some sort of elite or leadership structure will inevitably develop. In a lot of ways, having an unacknowledged leadership structure, she argued, can be a lot more damaging than having a formal one: at least with a formal structure it’s possible to establish precisely what’s expected of those who are doing the most important, coordinative tasks and hold them accountable.
One reason for the essay’s ongoing popularity is that it can be used to support such a wide variety of positions. Liberals and socialists regularly cite “The Tyranny of Structurelessness” as a justification for why any sort of anarchist organization is bound to fail, as a charter for a return to older, top-down styles of organization, replete with executive offices, steering committees, and the like. Egalitarians object that even to the extent this is true, it is far worse to have a leadership that feels fully entitled to its power than one that has to take accusations of hypocrisy seriously. Anarchists, therefore, have usually read Freeman’s argument as a call to formalize group process to ensure greater equality, and, in fact, most of her concrete suggestions—clarifying what tasks are assigned to what individuals, finding a way for the group to review those individuals’ performance, distributing responsibilities as widely as possible (perhaps by rotation), ensuring all have equal access to information and resources—were clearly meant to precisely that end.
Within the larger feminist movement itself, most of these arguments eventually became moot, because the anarchist moment was brief. Especially after Roe v. Wade made it seem strategically wise to rely on government power, the women’s movement was to take off in a decisively liberal direction, and to rely increasingly on organizational forms that were anything but egalitarian. But, for those still working in egalitarian collectives, or trying to create them, feminism had effectively framed the terms of debate. If you want to keep decision making to the smallest groups possible, how do those groups coordinate? Within those groups, how to prevent a clique of friends from taking over? How to prevent certain categories of participants (straight women, gay women, older women, students—in mixed groups it soon became, simply, women) from being marginalized? What’s more, even if mainstream feminists had abandoned the politics of direct action, there were plenty of radical feminists, not to mention anarchafeminists, around to try to keep such groups honest.
The origins of the current direct-action movement go back precisely to attempts to resolve those dilemmas. The pieces really started coming together in the antinuclear movement of the late 1970s, first with the founding of the Clamshell Alliance and the occupation of the Shoreham nuclear power plant in Massachusetts in 1977, then followed by the Abalone Alliance and struggles over the Diablo Canyon plant in California a few years later. The main inspiration for antinuclear activists—at least on questions of organization—were ideas propounded by a group called the Movement for a New Society (MNS), based in Philadelphia. MNS was spearheaded by a gay rights activist named George Lakey, who—like several other members of the group—was also an anarchist Quaker. Lakey and his friends proposed a vision of nonviolent revolution. Rather than a cataclysmic seizure of power, they proposed the continual creation and elaboration of new institutions, based on new, non-alienating modes of interaction—institutions that could be considered “prefigurative” insofar as they provided a foretaste of what a truly democratic society might be like. Such prefigurative institutions could gradually replace the existing social order (Lakey 1973). The vision in itself was hardly new. It was a nonviolent version of the standard anarchist idea of building a new society within the shell of the old. What was new was that men like Lakey, having been brought up Quakers, and acquired a great deal of experience with Quaker decision-making processes, had a practical vision of how some of these alternatives might actually work. Many of what have now become standard features of formal consensus process—the principle that the facilitator should never act as an interested party in the debate, the idea of the “block”—were first disseminated by MNS trainings in Philadelphia and Boston.
The antinuclear movement was also the first to make its basic organizational unit the affinity group—a kind of minimal unit of organization first developed by anarchists in early twentieth-century Spain and Latin America—and spokescouncils. As Starhawk pointed out in Chapter 1, all this was very much a learning process, a kind of blind experiment, and things were often extremely rocky. At first, organizers were such consensus purists that they insisted that any one individual had the right to block proposals even on a nationwide level, which proved entirely unworkable. Still, direct action proved spectacularly successful in putting the issue of nuclear power on the map. If anything, the movement fell victim to its own success. Though it rarely won a battle—that is, for a blockade to prevent the construction of any particular new plant—it very quickly won the war. US government plans to build a hundred new generators were scotched after a couple years and no new plans to build nuclear plants have been announced since. Attempts to move from nuclear plants to nuclear missiles and, from there, to a social revolution, however, proved more of a challenge, and the movement itself was never able to jump from the nuclear issue to become the basis of a broader revolutionary campaign. After the early 1980s, it largely disappeared.
This is not to say nothing was going on in the late 1980s and 1990s. Radical AIDS activists working with ACT UP, and radical environmentalists with groups like Earth First!, kept these techniques alive and developed them. In the 1990s, there was an effort to create a North American anarchist federation around a newspaper called Love & Rage that, at its peak, involved hundreds of activists in different cities. Still, it’s probably accurate to see this period less as an era of grand mobilizations than as one of molecular dissemination. A typical example is the story of Food Not Bombs, a group originally founded by a few friends from Boston who had been part of an affinity group providing food during the actions at Shoreham. In the early 1980s veterans of the affinity group set up shop in a squatted house in Boston and began dumpster-diving fresh produce cast off by supermarkets and restaurants, and preparing free vegetarian meals to distribute in public places. After a few years, one of the founding members moved to San Francisco and set up a similar operation there. Word spread (in part because of some dramatic, televised arrests) and, by the mid-1990s autonomous chapters of FNB were appearing all over America, and Canada as well. By the turn of the millennium, there were literally hundreds. But Food Not Bombs is not an organization. There is no overarching structure, no membership or annual meetings. It’s just an idea—that food should go to those that need it, and in a way that those fed can themselves become part of the process if they want to—plus some basic how-to information (now easily available on the Internet), and a shared commitment to egalitarian decision-making and a do-it-yourself (DIY) spirit. Gradually, cooperatives, anarchist infoshops, clinic defense groups, Anarchist Black Cross prisoner collectives, pirate radio collectives, squats, and chapters of Anti-Racist Action began springing up on a similar molecular basis across the continent. All became workshops for the creation of direct democracy. But, especially since so much of it developed not on campuses, but within countercultural milieus like the punk scene, it remained well below the radar of not only the corporate media, but even of standard progressive journals like Mother Jones or the Nation. This, in turn, explains how, when such groups suddenly began to coalesce and coordinate in Seattle, it seemed, for the rest of the country, as if a movement had suddenly appeared from nowhere.
By the time we get to Seattle, though, it’s impossible to even pretend such matters can be discussed within a national framework. What the press insists on calling the “anti-globalization movement” was, from the very beginning, a self-consciously global movement. The actions against the WTO Ministerial in Seattle were first proposed by PGA, a planetary network that came into being by the initiative of the Zapatista rebels in Chiapas. The emphasis on the WTO reflected the concerns of farmer’s groups in India and the tactics employed could equally well be seen as an amalgam of ideas drawn mainly from the Global South than as an indigenous American development. It was the Internet, above all, that made this possible. If nothing else, the Internet has allowed for a qualitative leap in the range and speed of molecular dissemination: there are now Food Not Bombs chapters, for instance, in Caracas and Bandung. The year or two directly after Seattle also saw the emergence of the network of Independent Media Centers, radical web journalism that has completely transformed the possibilities of information flow about actions and events. Activists who used to struggle for months and years to put on actions that were then entirely ignored by the media now know that anything they do will be picked up and reported instantly in photos, stories, and videos, across the planet—if only in a form accessed largely by other activists. The great problem has been how to translate the flow of information into structures of collective decision making—since decision making is the one thing that is almost impossible to do on the Internet. Or, more precisely, the question is: when and on what level are structures of collective decision making required? The Direct Action Network, and the Continental DAN structure that began to be set up in the months following Seattle, was a first effort to address this problem. Ultimately it foundered. In doing so, however, it also played a key role in disseminating certain models of direct democracy, and making their practice pretty much inextricable from the idea of direct action. It’s the conjunction between these two phenomenon, now pretty much irreversibly established in the most radical social movements in America and, increasingly, elsewhere, that’s the real subject of this book.
I started this book with the first CLAC tour that passed through New York in early 2000. Let me flash forward about a year and talk about the second CLAC tour to do so: one held prior to their “Take the Capital” action in Ottawa during the 2002 G8 meetings in Kananaskis.
The audience for such tours tended to consist mostly of white anarchists, but this time the CLAC people made a point of bringing in at least one speaker from a local community-based group in each city they passed through. In New York, this turned out to be an organizer named Ranjanit from a radical South Asian group called Desis Rising Up and Moving (DRUM). At that time, DRUM had earned enormous respect in New York activist circles for its work on immigration detention issues—of special interest there in the immediate wake of September 11, when hundreds of people of Middle Eastern or South Asian descent had been swept up and effectively disappeared.
The speakers from Canada described campaigns they’d been involved with, and talked about organizing dilemmas of one sort or another. Ranjanit’s talk was different. It consisted mainly of a condemnation of “activist culture.” He himself, he kept emphasizing, was not only of Indian descent but a working-class kid from Queens. He knew something about the communities with which he was working. Since Seattle, all anarchists have been talking about has been how to move away from “summit hopping” to working more closely with communities in struggle. The problem, he emphasized, was that they had developed their own styles of dress, mannerisms, ways of talking, tastes in music and food—a kind of hybrid mishmash of hippie, punk, and mainstream middle-class white culture, with incorporated chunks of more exotic revolutionary traditions—and this made it almost impossible for them to communicate with anyone outside their own little charmed circle. Some elements of this activist culture—the rejection of personal hygiene standards, for instance—were considered downright offensive by most of those with whom they wished to form alliances. Others, like the vegan diets, made it impossible to sit down at the table with almost anyone who was not already an activist. Activist culture was choking the promise of the movement, and anarchists had to make up their mind what they really wanted to do: create a (tiny, relatively privileged) community of their own, show up at IMF meetings and make grand declarations about the evils of global capitalism, or make a serious effort to work with real communities who were actually bearing the brunt of capitalist globalization.
You can’t be an anarchist in a big city in America without hearing some version of this critique on a fairly regular basis. In part, this is because it’s a critique that needs to be made. Much like the SDS activists described in the last chapter, few white participants in the direct action movement see themselves as coming from “cultures”; most see themselves simply as generic (“unmarked”) Americans, the kind whose issues and concerns are treated as universal, even if at the same time, they feel there is something about that generic American way of life that is deeply inhuman, unsustainable, and wrong. As anarchists and revolutionaries, therefore, they are faced with the same dilemma: whether to try to create an alternative culture of their own, or to concentrate on alliance work, supporting the struggles of those who suffer most under the existing system, but who are also willing to work with them as allies. To put it crudely: they have to choose between whether to focus on their own alienation or others’ oppression.
Certainly, in reality, almost everyone ends up doing a little of both. But this is precisely what leads to exactly the contradictions Ranjanit was pointing to. The more one creates one’s own, alternative culture, the more bizarre and outlandish one seems to outsiders, including those with whom one ostensibly wishes to ally. Many people of color see anarchist culture itself as a badge of white privilege being waved in their faces (as one African-American anarchist remarked, in regard to punk styles of dress and comportment, “If I went out on the street looking like that I’d be dragged down to the cop shop in fifteen minutes”). On the other hand, it seems unreasonable to ask anarchists to abandon all attempts to build an alternative culture, to fall back on a way of life they hate, just so as not to put others off.
But can one really be against a culture?
This is the question I want to explore in this chapter. “Culture” is a term with such universally positive associations nowadays, it’s already slightly odd to hear that the fact that certain people have a culture is treated as a problem. All the more so, when the culture in question is born from a conscious effort to create a less hierarchical, less alienated, and more democratic and ecologically sustainable form of life—to create the kind of culture that might befit a genuinely free society. It seems to me unraveling this paradox will bring us to the core of the fundamental dilemmas of the anarchist project.
Most often, activist culture is seen as problematic—as it was for Ranjanit—because it is seen as a form of white privilege, and arguments about activist culture are framed in terms of race. America’s racial divisions have, of course, been the scourge of radical politics in the United States for centuries. Historically, they have made the maintenance of ongoing class-based alliances extraordinarily difficult. Arguments like these regularly rip direct-action groups apart.
Let me consider one particularly well-documented example. In the 1990s, the Love & Rage Federation (Filipo 1993) dissolved over issues of white privilege. Love & Rage had begun as an initiative to create a continental anarchist network around a newspaper of the same name. In many ways it was quite successful. After ten years, however, they found themselves stubbornly unable to expand beyond their original core of middle-class white activists or include significant numbers of people of color.[27] Furious arguments ultimately broke out over the reasons for this: which also became theoretical debates about the nature of white privilege and ways of overcoming white supremacy.
Some argued that the problem was cultural. The vast majority of white anarchists first discovered anarchism through punk rock and its DIY culture. Walk into a typical anarchist infoshop, they pointed out, and you will almost inevitably be greeted by people with green hair and facial piercings. It doesn’t matter how welcoming they were: their very appearance obviously limited the appeal of such places to members of the white working class, let alone poor people of color. Others argued that the problem lay much deeper. The US, they argued, is a nation built on white supremacy, and whiteness is not a culture. When white people talk about their cultural heritage they talk about being German, or Irish, or Lithuanian, but never about whiteness. That’s because whiteness is a category of privilege, a tacit agreement with others categorized as “white”—from home loan associations or police superintendents—to provide aid and protection that is not provided to those not so classified. The only way to destroy the system of privilege is to subvert the category of whiteness, so as to ultimately destroy it.
This was a position being developed in circles surrounding the journal Race Traitor, which was launched around this time and avidly read in activist circles. Its motto was “Treason to Whiteness Is Loyalty to Humanity.” This was a very appealing notion, but the obvious question then became: how does one actually do that? How does one become an effective race traitor? Who might be an example of an effective role model? Many in Love & Rage found inspiration in the example of Subcomandante Marcos, the famous masked spokesman of the Mexican Zapatistas. Marcos was originally a middle-class Mexican who led a group of mostly privileged urban revolutionaries to organize indigenous communities in Chiapas and, after ten years in the jungle, came to abandon his vanguardist ideology in order to become an agent carrying out decisions made by the indigenous communities. In his willingness to step back and accept the leadership of oppressed communities, he could be considered an example of a genuine race traitor. But Marcos, for his part, had the advantage of being able to ally with indigenous communities that already acted very much like anarchists, with their own style of consensus-based direct democracy. What did this mean for anarchists in the United States, where most revolutionary groups based in communities of color were far more hierarchically organized—where, in fact, many saw emphases on direct democracy as itself a form of white privilege? Would all this mean having to abandon any idea of building a new society in the shell of the old? Or, at least, of white anarchists playing any significant role in the process of doing so? Within a year or two, Love & Rage split into feuding factions over racial issues, and the entire project ultimately foundered.
Similar debates erupted in the early days of the globalization movement. In this case the kick-off was a piece called “Where Was the Color in Seattle?” (Martinez 2000), that sparked continual arguments about the nature of racial privilege, outreach versus alliance models, about how to accept the leadership of communities of color, and about the stifling effects of white guilt. The overwhelmingly white make-up of the emerging movement was felt to be a continual crisis. Certainly this was true of New York City Direct Action Network, originally founded to help coordinate the actions against the IMF and World Bank in Washington on April 16, 2000. DAN’s second major initiative was to help organize actions against the Republican Convention in Philadelphia that summer. In order to do so, a group of DAN organizers proposed to ally with SLAM,[28] a radical student group based at Hunter College with a much more diverse membership, and several other POC-based organizations. In those days in the immediate wake of Seattle, everyone was eager to learn DAN’s tactics and forms of organization, so the latter were not averse; but they also insisted that the actions themselves focus on the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal (the Black activist and journalist then on death row in Philadelphia) and more broadly on the US Prison Industrial Complex, and racist nature of the criminal justice system. These demands isolated a significant faction in DAN who had seen the convention protests as a chance to move from issues of global trade to a broader challenge to the existing political system as a whole; to juxtapose their own model of direct democracy to the kind of corporate-dominated representative democracy embodied by the conventions. Some felt the two were reconcilable: that prison and death penalties issues could be used, ultimately, to raise the same broader questions. Others felt the compromise was worth the opportunity to create an ongoing alliance. In the end, the effort did not, in fact, lead to an ongoing alliance, and resulting recriminations caused quite a number of activists to give up on DAN entirely. However,the alliance, however temporary, was quite helpful in disseminating DAN-like tactics and styles of decision making, and even anarchist ideas themselves, in wider activist circles. Shortly after NYC DAN effectively dissolved in 2003, a new “Anarchist People of Color” network (APOC) was in the process of taking shape, based on almost identical organizational principles.
The early experience of APOC, however, already provides an excellent illustration of why direct-action-oriented groups had tended to be dominated by people classified as “white.” When those who lack white privilege began to adopt such politics, they found they faced completely different levels of police repression. As one particularly startling incident in Brooklyn revealed, APOC couldn’t even throw a benefit party in their own offices without having to worry about local police sweeping in to beat and arrest partygoers talking on the street.
All this was, perhaps, predictable. It is a notorious thing that during large-scale actions, police seem to target people of color for particular violence. As a result, many (non-anarchist) POC activist groups see direct action as itself a form of racial privilege, and made a great point of trying to keep those likely to engage in militant tactics away from their events. The short-lived Los Angeles DAN, which organized the protests against the Democratic convention in 2000, took the need to ally with community groups so seriously that they refused to allow their spaces to be used for anarchist meetings at all, and even employed marshals to exclude Black Bloc anarchists from their marches.
New York DAN was very different. To all intents and purposes it was itself an anarchist group. Still, it quickly found itself in trouble for its refusal take the same path as LA DAN. Immediately after A16, for instance, NYC DAN and an allied group—New York Reclaim the Streets—joined with several Mexican immigrant groups to organize a May Day march through lower Manhattan. It was to be an entirely peaceful—indeed, permitted—event, replete with musical bands and giant puppets. Still, as the marchers first assembled at Union Square, a tiny cluster of perhaps sixteen anarchists in Black Bloc appeared, simply intending to show the flag, as it were, and establish an overtly anarchist presence at the event. Before the march even started, police swooped in and arrested about a dozen of them.[29] The Mexican organizers were outraged, but less at the police than at their DAN fellow organizers, accusing them of putting their people—many of them undocumented workers—at risk by allowing a Black Bloc to assemble to begin with. They swore never to work with DAN again.
It’s pretty obvious that when police launch preemptive strikes like this, fomenting divisions of this sort is half the point. The NYPD has actually proved remarkably adept at playing this sort of game, and has in fact made a habit, during particularly sensitive marches organized by POC groups, of nabbing one or two white anarchists on trumped-up charges. A year after the May Day March, during a march appealing for clemency for Native American activist Leonard Peltier in December 2000, for instance, an NYPD snatch squad suddenly broke into the middle of the march to tackle and drag away four (unmasked) anarchists. One was charged with possession of a battery-operated megaphone without a sound permit, the others with “resisting arrest.” This was a very delicate issue, and everyone was making strenuous efforts to avoid anything that could be interpreted as a provocation: none of the anarchists were wearing masks, the woman with the megaphone had not in fact been using it but simply carrying it from one permitted rally point to another (and anyway, as many pointed out, there’s no such thing as a moving sound permit). Still, the fact that everyone knew the arrests were a pretext and consciously intended to sow dissension didn’t really matter. Afterwards, many activists who based their strategy on building alliances with POC groups (including, in this case, several former members of Love & Rage, now turned Maoists) argued that the very presence of black-clad anarchists could itself be considered a provocation. As a result, such activists often ended up challenging the very principle of direct action.
Whatever the underlying reasons, though, there’s one thing that it’s crucial to emphasize. Groups like DAN were largely white. Particularly striking was the absence of African Americans. For most of its history, NYC DAN had a single Black member, in an active core group of about fifty. This is not to say it was anything like exclusively white. There were always a fair number of Latinos (though more likely to be from countries like Brazil or Argentina than, say Mexico or Puerto Rico), and even larger numbers of activists of South or East Asian (Chinese, Taiwanese, Korean) or Middle Eastern (Turkish, Egyptian, Iranian) descent. Still, their numbers all put together rarely came to more than a third of the active membership. As for the rest, if they had any self-conscious ethnic identity, it was most likely to be Jewish or Irish. While DAN was certainly more diverse than, say, early SDS, in a city as diverse as New York, this was considered a matter of scandal.
I will be returning to the specifically racial issues periodically. They are the bane of all radical politics in North America. What I want to emphasize here is that these dilemmas are not simply effects of racism. Similar dilemmas crop up whenever one has a movement trying to combat situations of extreme social inequality. Always, those on the bottom, who have the most reason to want to challenge such inequalities, will also tend to have the most restricted range of weapons at their disposal with which to do so. Inevitably, this causes endless moral dilemmas for those whose privilege actually allows them to rebel.
This is not a new phenomenon. There is a vast literature on the subject. Eric Wolf (1969), for example, pointed out that in every peasant revolt we know about, the backbone of guerilla armies is always the middle peasantry; since the poorest stratum lacks the means to carry out a sustained insurrection, and the wealthiest lacks motivation. Similarly, E. P. Thompson (1971) and others have demonstrated that the mainstays of Early Modern “bread riots”—in reality, events very like what we would now call direct actions—tended to hail from the more prosperous among the laboring classes: neither bourgeois nor paupers, but members of the respectable working class. In fact, much of the early literature on radical movements seemed to argue that it was impossible for the truly oppressed to become genuine revolutionaries. Karl Mannheim (1929, also Norman Cohen 1957), for example, argued that not only do the truly oppressed tend not to engage in sustained revolt, their mode of imagining social alternatives tends to be absolute and millenarian. While the middle stratum “was disciplining itself through a conscious self-cultivation which regarded ethics and intellectual culture as its principle self-justification” (1929:73), and were developing rational utopias, the truly marginal tended to favor a kind of ecstatic vision of sudden and total rupture. Mannheim called this “chiliasm”—“a mental structure peculiar to oppressed peasants, journeymen, and incipient ‘Lumpenproletariat,’ [and] fanatically emotional preachers” (1929:204).[30] Hence, when the poorest elements did rise up, they tended to do so in the name of some great millenarian vision, in the belief that the world as we know it would soon come to an end in one blow and existing hierarchies be swept away. Now, while few nowadays would give much credence to the idea that the poor live in an eternal present or are incapable of long-term planning, Mannheim does have something of a point. Revolutionary movements have always tended to take on much of their temper and direction from those very “middle strata.” At the very least, there has always been something of a gap in this respect between those who suffered the most in an unequal society and those most able to organize effective sustained opposition. In other words, those “most affected”—as the current activist catchphrase puts it—by feudal or capitalist structures rarely, if ever, organized openly against it. One can argue, like Jim Scott (1985, 1992), that the hidden resistance of the lowly is a great unrecognized force in world history—and surely one would be right. But rarely does this resistance take the form of overt rebellion.
When those disjunctions are superimposed over more profound ascriptions of difference—like race, culture, ethnicity—they become far more visible. But it seems to me they are always going to be there in some form or another. They are simply one of the inevitable side effects of social inequality.[31]
Of course, in the case of the globalization movement one common popular perception is that we are not even talking about members of a middle stratum, but about members of the elite. This idea has become so deeply entrenched, in fact, that it has become common wisdom not only among conservative commentators, but to some degree, to the public more generally. Before going on, then, let me briefly take on this perception: one which is, of course, a social phenomenon in its own right.
The stereotype runs something like this. The core of the “anti-globalization movement” is made up of rich or upper-middle-class teenagers, “trust fund babies” who can afford to spend their lives traveling from summit to summit making trouble. In a way, the accusation was predictable enough. Right-wing populism in the US is largely based on the accusation that liberals are part of an upper-middle-class elite whose values are deeply alien to that of working-class Americans. It would be hardly surprising that, faced with leftist radicals, the first instinct of a right-wing talk-radio host would be to assume that if liberals were drawn from the prosperous, revolutionaries would have to be drawn from the actual rich. On the other hand, if one examines the record, one finds that some of the first figures to make such claims—this was around the time of the Republican and Democratic conventions in the summer of 2000[32]—were figures of authority in the cities expecting protests (for example, the mayor of LA and Philadelphia police chief John Timoney), in a tone that certainly implied access to some kind of actual sociological information they could not possibly have had. These were in fact the very political figures who immediately afterwards ordered police to attack what even by conventional definitions were largely nonviolent protesters. It certainly gives one reason to wonder: especially, since so many police in Seattle had at first balked when given similar orders. Given the fact that a whole series of other rumors seemed to mysteriously appear around the same time about activists attacking police with acid and urine, one can only wonder whether this was part of a more calculated campaign to appeal to the class prejudices of the police themselves. The message, at the conventions and similar mobilizations, seemed to be: “Do not think of yourself as a working-class guy being paid to protect a bunch of bankers, politicians and trade bureaucrats who have contempt for you; think of this, rather, as an opportunity to beat up on their snotty children”—an understanding which would be, for the politicians’ purposes, perfect, since they also did not want the police to actually maim or kill the protesters. Whether this sort of imagery emerges from police intelligence sources—which tend to draw heavily on research units from private security firms and conservative think tanks, and often, to reproduce very odd forms of right-wing propaganda—or whether police were actually listening to conservative radio hosts, is, at this juncture, impossible to say.[33] If nothing else, activists at major summits ever since have regularly reported more or less the same accusations on the part of police—as one friend summarized it to me: “You’re all just a bunch of rich kids who put on masks so your daddies can’t see your faces on the news when you go smash things up, and then go back home to your mansions and watch it all on TV and laugh at us.”
If nothing else, the rumors became remarkably consistent.
What follows is not based on statistical methodology of any sort, but having spent over seven years now among anarchists and others involved in direct action and I think I am in a position to make some initial generalizations. The first is that activists from truly wealthy backgrounds are exceedingly rare. In terms of economic background, in fact, anarchists tend to be extremely diverse. If there’s anything that does set them off from the bulk of Americans it is that they are disproportionally likely to have attended college. Many, of course, are themselves students, but the activist core seems to be made up of what might even be called post-students: young women and men who have completed college, but are still living something like students, at least insofar as they are not mostly in regular, career-oriented nine-to-five jobs or child-rearing households.
I should emphasize while this is the core, it’s certainly not the overwhelming majority. In New York, for instance, there is now an anarchist mothers’ group. The average meeting of NYC DAN would normally include high school students and retirees as well, along with, say, forty-year-old squatters, many of whom had never attended an institution of higher learning. And NYC DAN was considered by many other activists decidedly upscale. The closer to the squatter scene one gets, the more one encounters activists without formal schooling, and this becomes almost universally the case when one gets to the level of the “travelers”—mostly teens and men and women in their twenties, runaways or living lives of voluntarily homelessness, moving from city to city. Just as, in the heyday of the IWW in the early decades of the twentieth century, there was a rich culture of hobos and hoppers of freight trains, so there is still today. And then as now, most do consider themselves anarchists. Many are orphans, escapees, or runaways of very modest backgrounds, with little access to educational institutions, though many are avid readers, and many versed in radical theory—in my own experience, most often, some variation on French Situationism. While the “travelers” may be numerically a relatively minor element in the movement, and somewhat marginal (most hate meetings), there are likely to be significantly more of them at any major mobilization than anyone who actually has a trust fund. They are also extremely important symbolically, because they set a kind of romantic standard for autonomous existence—dumpster-diving food, refusing paid employment—that represents one possible ideal for those wishing to establish an existence outside the logic of capitalism.
There are also those who join such a world voluntarily: they normally are college-educated, or sometimes college dropouts of a far more exalted social class. This is the sort of universe celebrated in popular anarchist books like CrimethInc’s novel Evasion (2001), a semi-fantasy of middle-class, white, punk kids who drop out to join this world, living off trash and the left-overs of industrial society.[34] Such a life can represent a kind of vision of moral purity, a total rejection of an industrial society seen as an engine for the production of enormous quantities of waste. Insofar as it is assumed to be no longer possible to simply leave the system, to establish an autonomous existence in the woods[35], the best one can do is to live off its flotsam and jetsam. Many dumpster divers are quite proud of the fact that, despite the fact that they live off trash, they manage to maintain rigorous vegetarian diets. Many younger anarchists, the more “hardcore” sorts, follow suit to varying degrees. In New York, there is a young man named Thaddeus who claims he manages to get by on roughly five dollars a month, occupying empty buildings until the police expel him, dumpster-diving food, and all the while producing, with some friends, a monthly guide to free events in New York. Thaddeus is a regular of the direct action scene. He’s something of an extreme case, and considered rather a heroic figure as a result, but many see this as really “living the life” in a way that most do not. While few resort to, say, street hustling or theft, for those who do there is a strong ethic of shoplifting, that insists that it is only legitimate to steal from large corporate outlets, never “mom and pop” stores[36]) if they can avoid it. Practices like dumpster diving are considered entirely ordinary in anarchist circles. In the kitchen of the New York offices of the Independent Media Center (IMC) there was posted, for many years, the schedule indicating at what times local restaurants were legally obliged to throw away their sushi. Activists on bicycles would regularly make the rounds to pick up piles of sushi rolls, all still neatly shrink-wrapped in plastic trays and containers, and deposit them in the IMC refrigerator. At another stop one can regularly find perfectly edible breadrolls and bagels. As Food Not Bombs activists often point out before major mobilizations, there’s absolutely no problem scrounging up free food for, say, ten thousand people in a city like New York, if one wants to put in the effort—though coming up with the utensils can often be more difficult.
There is, I should also note, a counter-discourse here. The majority of activists, who are trying to come to some kind of compromise with the mainstream economy can just as easily dismiss the travelers and squatters and dumpster divers as “crusties,” “cruddies,” “gutter-punks” coasting on their white privilege, or as middle-class kids playing at poverty in a way insulting to the real hardships of the homeless or dispossessed.[37] But often the critique is mixed with a sort of ambivalent respect, too.
Most activists—and again, I am using the term “activist” here mainly as a short-hand for “anarchist or others involved in anarchist-inspired direct action politics”—do feel they have to make some compromise with the existing economic order. Most feel that how one does so is very much a personal call. It is rather rare, in my experience, to hear the same sort of accusations of “selling out,” of compromise as treason, that were so common in the 1960s and 1970s. Obviously, if one became a publicity agent for Monsanto, or a stockbroker, it would certainly be felt to compromise one’s activist credentials. But it would have to be something almost that extreme.[38] Obviously, here too there are exceptions. The more hardcore one’s own choices, the more likely one is to write off those who live a more comfortable or compromised style of life.
Older activists (over thirty, or especially, over forty) who are most likely to have full-time jobs often work in industries centering on the dissemination of knowledge and ideas. In the New York scene I know a handful of writers and journalists, a large number of teachers (especially grade school through high school), librarians, even one high school guidance counselor, and many tied in one way or another to the printing industry (a very traditional radical occupation). Some are theater managers, playwrights, choreographers, or otherwise adjacent to the arts. A surprisingly small number, in my own experience, work full time for NGOs (at least this is true in the specifically direct action end of things). Younger activists—the majority, living that kind of extended quasi-adolescence that I’ve called “post-student”—tend towards the sort of part-time jobs that allow very flexible times and hours. This is partly because the changing nature of the job market in the US has made full-time work harder to come by—many end up temping—but also because flexibility is so important to them. Some pick up a specific translatable skill: they learn bartending or web design, become lighting or sound technicians, acquire skills in catering. All are skills that make it fairly easy to pick up work for a week or a month and then move on. (Working as a musician also gives flexibility, but it pays so little one really can’t support oneself without working full time.) Some work in activist-friendly enterprises: most often vegan kitchens or health-food stores. Others become civil engineers.[39] There are also a handful of full-time organizers who work for activist groups like the Rainforest Action Network, Ruckus Society, various peace groups, or labor unions, or needle-exchange programs, though these jobs pay notoriously little and activists of more modest means often can’t afford to take them. Many such jobs pay nothing at all, but activists will still do them on a part-time volunteer basis.
In what follows, I’ll try to outline an ideal-typical activist life-course, generalizing from people I knew in DAN, CLAC, the ACC, IMC and similar groups in the Northeast around 2000–2003. Doing so is necessarily a hypothetical exercise, since it assumes history will remain constant (which is unlikely) but projecting current patterns one might come up with something like this:
Our ideal-typical direct actionist is likely to either become politicized in high school, especially through the punk scene, or in college, becoming active in campus organizations. After either graduating or dropping out of college, they are likely to spend anywhere between one and ten years of intense involvement in activist groups. During the first few years, they will attend meetings regularly, perhaps, three, four or five a week (in the days right before action, sometimes four or five a day), usually in a variety of different groups, while supporting themselves through casual or part-time labor. This first phase is very intense and almost impossible to sustain continuously. Most break it up in one way or another. For example, one might spend six months doing activist work in one’s home town, then spend a few months intensely working for money; then, once one has saved enough for an airplane ticket, take off to some distant locale: to help set up IMCs in South America, do solidarity work on the West Bank or Chiapas, absorb the squatter scene in Europe, or participate in a tree-sit. Many at this stage are on the road around half the time. Or one might keep oneself sane by occasionally plunging into a completely different sort of project—an artistic one, for example, an intense romance—only to reappear a few months later. One might run off for a few months to work on an organic farm—a habit so common there’s actually an acronym for it: to woof (Work on an Organic Farm).[40] Those who concentrate all their energies on one place often tend to burn out completely after a year or two, and quit in exasperation; or else, find some specific, international or community-related project to concentrate their energies on and withdraw from everything else. As a result, groups like NYC DAN soon came to be made up of an active core and a kind of penumbra of semi-retired activists who were never really seen at meetings any more, but did often show up at actions or parties, and whose knowledge, contacts, and experience were available for those who still had personal contact with them.
Younger anarchists who don’t live in squats—again, the majority don’t—often live in collective houses or apartments, frequently in poor or artsy, gentrifying neighborhoods. Some live in activist spaces: there were several people living in the New York IMC during the years 2000 to 2003, and others in Walker Space, a kind of IMC adjunct that housed a performance space and television studios. Those prosperous enough to be able to afford a reasonablesize apartment often allowed at least some space in the apartment to be used for larger collective purposes.
Eventually, almost everyone ends up in a kind of semi-retirement. Those who become professional, paid activists usually end up in a different social milieu. Some go to grad school: grad students typically remain involved for a few years, then, as they become overwhelmed with work and experience the pressures of professionalization, drop out of activism entirely.[41] Others have children, or settle down—frequently with non-activists—or finally take on full-time, career employment. There are, certainly, those who maintain an ongoing presence nonetheless, but this is typically either because they find some career that keeps them close to the activist universe—become a labor lawyer and still do legal work for anarchists as well, for example; or manage a radical bookstore; or because they continue to live in a collective house, or squat, or intentional community; or else, because they learn how to carefully limit their involvement to a single, manageable project. The latter is difficult, since demands on an activist’s time are potentially infinite. The trick to staying involved over the long term is to find a way to resist the temptation to overcommit. Relatively few, in my experience, successfully manage to do this.
One’s later thirties, or certainly forties and fifties, then, are typically a period of complete or near-complete withdrawal. But if historical patterns hold, there is, for a certain number, a period even later in life of reengagement. After one’s children are in college, one breaks up with a long-term partner, or retires, one might very well find oneself drawn back into the world of activism again, occasionally, at least for a little while, on as intense basis as at the beginning.
I’ve mentioned that the only sense in which those involved in direct action could be said to be part of an elite is educational: the large majority have had some access to higher education, despite the fact that most Americans (slightly over half) have not.
Otherwise, if one looks at class backgrounds and trajectories, one encounters endless variation. Again, I have not conducted surveys. Still, I can say from my own personal experience that in the Northeast, the actual number of activists with trust funds can be counted on one hand. There are far fewer, in fact, than, say, the number of activists whose parents are career military officers—which is actually surprisingly high. But we are dealing with relatively small numbers in either case.
Speaking broadly, it seems to me activist milieus can best be seen as a juncture, a kind of meeting place, between downwardly mobile elements of the professional classes and upwardly mobile children of the working class. The first consist of children of white-collar backgrounds who reject their parents’ way of life: the daughter of a tax accountant who chooses to work as a carpenter, the daughter of veterinarian who chose to live as a graphic artist, the son of a middle manager who chooses to become a civil engineer or professional activist. The other consisted of children from blue-collar backgrounds who go to college.
In historical terms, both correspond to a classic stereotype. The first represents the classic recruitment base for artistic bohemia; if not children of the bourgeoisie, as they were often assumed to be in 1850s Paris, where the term was first coined, then children born to members of administrative or professional elites, living in voluntary poverty, experimenting with more pleasurable, artistic, less alienated forms of life. The second represents the classic stereotype of the revolutionary, particularly in the Global South: children of the laboring classes (workers, peasants, small shop-owners even) whose parents strived all their life to get their sons or daughters into college, or even who managed to get themselves bourgeois levels of education by their own efforts, only to discover that bourgeois levels of education do not actually allow entry into the bourgeoisie, or often, any sort of regular work at all. One can compile endless examples among the ranks of the last century’s revolutionary heroes: from Mao (child of peasants turned librarian), to Fidel Castro (unemployed lawyer from Cuba), and so on. In fact, both bohemia and revolutionary circles have historically tended to be a meeting place of both.
Obviously this is a highly schematized picture. First of all, it leaves out some significant groups entirely: for example, those who adopted bohemian lifestyles because their parents were bohemian, or the children of professional activists. One should not underestimate the degree of self-reproduction in such sub-classes. Also: while the stereotype of the bohemian as rich kid—secretly supporting his absinthe habits with money from home, eventually either to die of dissipation or go back to the board of daddy’s company—is strikingly similar to the stereotype of the activist as trust-fund baby, it is probably no more accurate. Certainly there have always been scions of the bourgeoisie in both milieus, all the more influential for their money, social skills, and connections. But bohemian milieus of the last 150 years never really consisted primarily of children of the upper, or even professional, classes. As Pierre Bourdieu (1993) has recently shown, the social base for nineteenth century bohemian culture in Europe emerged, in part, through exactly the same processes that shaped social revolutionaries in the Global South: among talented children of peasants, for example, who had taken advantage of France’s new educational system, and then found themselves excluded from conventional elite culture anyway. What’s more, these milieus tended to overlap. Bohemia was full not only of working-class intellectuals and self-taught eccentrics, but outright revolutionaries. The friendship between Oscar Wilde and Peter Kropotkin was not atypical; actually, it could be taken as emblematic. Similarly, revolutionary circles have always been filled with children of privilege who have rejected their natal values: Karl Marx (lawyer’s son turned penniless journalist) being the archetypical example. Every Mao had his Chou En-lai, even Castro had his Ché. The constitution of both milieus, then, is really quite similar. Which probably helps explain why artists have felt so consistently drawn to revolutionary politics.
All this is important to bear in mind, especially because there are those who have consistently tried to keep the two apart. In the 1990s, for example, social ecologist Murray Bookchin threw down the gauntlet in an essay called “Social Anarchism or Lifestyle Anarchism: An Unbridgeable Divide,” in which he argues that anarchist theory has always had two sources: the individualist tradition tracing back to bourgeois bohemian figures like Stirner, and the social anarchism that emerged from the labor movement, with Proudhon, Bakunin, and Kropotkin:
Hardly any anarcho-individualists exercised an influence on the emerging working class. They expressed their opposition in uniquely personal forms, especially in fiery tracts, outrageous behavior, and aberrant lifestyles in the cultural ghettoes of fin de siécle New York, Paris, and London. As a credo, individualist anarchism remained largely a bohemian lifestyle, most conspicuous in its demands for sexual freedom (“free love”) and enamored of innovations in art, behavior, and clothing (Bookchin 1997).
Even the bomb-throwers of the 1890s, assassins of heads of state, Bookchin suggests, were not social anarchists (and it’s true that they almost never seemed to be part of organized groups), but extreme individualists acting out their personal rage. While Bookchin doesn’t really pursue the argument—the article is mainly a platform for an attack on John Zerzan, Bob Black, and Hakim Bey—the practical implications seem to lead in much the same place as Ranjanit’s: a rejection of any existing “activist culture” as a product of bourgeois privilege, as setting one apart from the genuinely oppressed.
The essay as one might imagine has drawn almost endless attacks and made Bookchin’s name anathema for whole sections of the anarchist movement. In fact, it seems to me the premise is simply wrong. This is not an unbridgeable divide. There was never anything remotely unbridgeable about it. Instead, I would argue the main problem for would-be revolutionary coalitions is that they always combine those primarily in rebellion against alienation, and those primarily in rebellion against oppression, and that the dilemma is always how to synthesize the two.
One of my most striking memories of the NYC Direct Action Network was a very early meeting at which we were discussing a potential fundraiser. Someone announced they had booked a space for a benefit show and asked if anyone in the room had any particular skills or talents to contribute. Just about every single hand in the room went up. In the end, the facilitator asked everyone to go around in a circle and announce what they could do: there were poets, scene painters, fire jugglers, members of a cappella singing groups, shadow dancers, performance artists, flamenco guitarists, punk singers, magicians… Of forty-two people in the room, it turned out there were precisely five who could not come up with anything they might be able to contribute. It was all the more remarkable because DAN—unlike say, Reclaim the Streets, an allied New York group—was not even considered, by activist standards, a particularly artsy group. The direct-action scene in general is overwhelmingly dominated by people who were also engaged in some kind of creative self-expression. Musicians. Puppeteers. Drama people. Cartoonists. Artists. Much of this could be said to emerge just as much from the DIY (Do It Yourself) ethos of punk culture as the craftsperson-oriented small-scale creativity of hippie culture.[42]
Just one telling case study:
Glass’ father is a policeman, her mother an aerobics and yoga instructor. In high school she was a punk who made her own clothes, designing elaborate creations from cast-off and dumpster-dived clothing. She tells me she has keen memories of being laughed at by the “fashion punks,” rich kids who bought their clothes pre-ripped at expensive boutiques, and how ridiculous they were, unaware they were proving themselves frauds to the whole spirit of what they were doing. She put herself through college largely by winning writing contests. After graduating she worked briefly for a glossy ecological magazine, lost her job when the magazine went bankrupt (she was never paid for most of her work) and now, in her mid-twenties, alternates between bartending and activist adventures, living in squats everywhere from Cleveland to Buenos Aires to Honolulu, occasionally publishing pieces in national magazines. Her aim she says is to buy land and spend at least half her time on a collectively managed, permaculture farm.
Characters like this could be seen, as I say, as trapped in a kind of suspended social adolescence. After all, in America, everyone engages in creative activities as a child (indeed one is forced to in school, from finger-painting to school plays). Normally, as one leaves adolescence one is expected to give most of this up. Adults, unless they are lucky enough to find a career involving creative work, are expected to express themselves largely through consumerism, or perhaps some kind of hobby—the latter especially when they retire. To my mind, though, this helps explain one of the great paradoxes of radical politics. One might say: adolescence is for most Americans the stage when one is simultaneously most alienated, and least alienated. This is why revolution can sometimes be pictured as a final overcoming of the adolescence of humanity—the break with the past that will finally rescue us from our perennial alienated state—or as the dawn of a kind of eternal adolescence, “the beginning of history.” For most of us who are not living within the confines of a caste or guild society, adolescence is a period of potential: one could do, or be, almost anything. Maturity, social adulthood, is not even so much a matter of accepting one’s particular role (as secretary, security guard, fund manager, mechanic) but even more, of coming to accept all those things that one is never going to be: rock star, olympic ski jumper, globe-trotting investigate reporter, first woman president, etc. If one looks at Marx’s one famous (and notoriously minimal) attempt to define communism, it’s almost completely defined around not having to do this: one can go fishing in the morning, herd sheep in the afternoon, and criticize over dinner, all without ever becoming a fisherman, shepherd, or critic. One is a generic human, undefined by one’s current role. In contemporary terms, a perpetual adolescent.
This is not to say activists are immature—unless, that is, one assumes maturity necessarily has to be a matter of renouncing one’s creativity and sense of possibility, and accepting a life of mind-numbing boredom and daily subservience. Neither, though, do I find it useful to see all this simply in terms of “resistance”—at least, in the conventional academic sense that assumes that, since power is the ultimate reality, any form of practice can only be seen as either reproducing or resisting it.[43] This is why it seems to me more useful to return to the alternative intellectual traditions that activists largely prefer, and to see the operative terms here as a balance between the revolt against alienation and the revolt against oppression.
The hippies of the 1960s, and then the punk movement of the late 1970s and 1980s, have been seen as the first movements of mass bohemianism[44]: a broad popularizaton of the bohemian ideal of the sacrifice of bourgeois comforts for the pursuit of spontaneity, creativity, and pleasure. Or one might see them as points where forms of bohemianism themselves took on the aspect of mass movements. There is of course an endless debate about the significance of all this: to what degree is this all a form of resistance (i.e., Hebdige 1979), to what extent are these movements really the avant garde of consumerism, exploring domains of experience that can be effectively commodified in the next generation (Campbell 1987). For me, though, one of the interesting things is the degree to which these historically constituted categories become, effectively, permanent. They are seen as modes of being. The sense today is that there will always be punks and hippies:
Extract from notebooks, Winter 2001
Brief excursus on the terms “punk” and “hippie”
No one would ever use these terms to describe themselves. I’ve never heard anyone say “I am a punk” or “I am a hippie.” They are terms you use to describe someone else. In East Coast circles, to call someone a hippie is always to make fun of them, at least slightly: this despite the fact that half the time, the speaker herself might so be considered from another point of view—i.e., Brooke’s comment about the new Santa Cruz chapter of DAN, “probably a bunch of hippies and deadheads but we love them anyway.” Or: “when you’re proposing we organize a drum circle, are we talking good drumming, or just bad hippie drumming?” The term “punk” in contrast is almost never pejorative, It tends to be used in a more simply descriptive fashion: i.e., “I’m talking about Laura. You know, that kind of punky girl with the green hair?”
Still, there are very few who can be easily and clearly categorized as either one or the other. Some exist. Ariston with her mohawk is pretty obviously very punk; Neala is hard to see as anything but a hippie (even if her partner is about as Goth as one can be). But these are extreme cases. Most are more like, say, Warcry, who wears dirty hooded sweatshirts and patches as she arranges leaves and flowers all over the Indypendent Media Center walls—an idiosyncratic mix of both.
Often the terms are contrasted generationally, with the hippies always being the stodgy older generation. Brad talks about the striking contrast between the old fashioned, 1960s-style, hippie forest blockades in Oregon and Northern California and the new energy and militant tactics introduced when the punk kids got involved. This coming from a forest activist who, though instrumental in bringing the punks to the forest in the first place, is, by New York standards, nothing if not a hippie. “Hippie” in fact regularly becomes a synonym for “pacifist,” and “punk” for “younger, militant anarchist.” Thus, in Seattle when self-appointed “peace cops” in some cases physically assaulted Black Bloc anarchists to stop them from breaking windows (the Black Bloc anarchists refused to hit back, since they were nonviolent) it’s almost always described as a case of “punks getting beaten up by hippies.”
Of course, these are hardly the only terms evoked (I am not even entering into the influence of the rave scene, for example, or radical hiphop), but I don’t think it’s illegitimate to focus on the centrality of punk, if only because so many of the most active white anarchists seem to have been drawn in from an early experience of the punk scene.
A lot has been written about punk as a subculture, but what I want to emphasize here is the role of punk as a venue for the dissemination of a kind of pop Situationism. This Situationist legacy is probably the single most important theoretical influence on contemporary anarchism in America, and it means that—much though many anarchists are familiar with academic terminologies—they are using a very different theoretical vocabulary.
The Situationist International was originally a group of radical artists who, over the course of the 1950s and 1960s, transformed themselves into a political movement. One can see them as the culmination of a certain trend. From at least the time of the Dadaists and Futurists, avant-garde artistic movements had begun acting like vanguardist parties, putting out manifestos, purging one another, and the like. The Situationists were the first that made the transition entirely, ultimately making no original art of their own at all. As a group, they behaved like a kind of caricature send-up of Marxist sectarians, constantly purging and condemning one another.[45] Guy Debord (1967) laid out an elaborate dialectical theory of “the society of the spectacle,” arguing that under capitalism, the relentless logic of the commodity—which renders us passive consumers—gradually extends itself to every aspect of our existence. In the end, we are rendered a mere audience to our own lives. Mass media is just one technological embodiment of this process. The only remedy is to create “situations,” improvised moments of spontaneous, unalienated creativity, largely by turning aside the imposed meanings of the spectacle, breaking apart the pieces and putting them together in subversive ways. (Hence the most enduringly popular Situationist product, called “Can the Dialectic Break Bricks?,” often shown at fundraisers, is a Hong Kong kung fu film, resubtitled.) Raoul Vaneigem (1967, 1979) elaborated a theory of revolution built around a destruction of all relations built on the principle of exchange, on “survival” as opposed to “life,” with an often odd, jangly, but still somehow exhilarating, mix of ultraleft Marxism—a glorification of spontaneous worker’s councils and the insurrectionary wildcat strike—and the pursuit of unmediated forms of pleasure, an unleashing of desire and the collapse of art into life.
There’s actually a concrete, genealogical connection between punk and Situationism. Malcolm McLaren, the English producer who effectively invented the Sex Pistols, and hence the punk movement, had been involved in a Situationist splinter group and Sex Pistols’ artist Jamie Reid used Situationist principles to design their cover art and general aesthetic (Savage 1991). Whether McLaren was serious or not (some—e.g., Elliot 2001—claim he was just talking out of his hat), Situationist principles have become firmly ensconced in the punk philosophy—particularly among the hundreds of smaller, explicitly anarchist punk bands that emerged in the 1980s and 1990s (Crass, Conflict, the Exploited, the Dead Kennedys). Catchy lines from Vaneigem endlessly recur in song lyrics, and Situationist literature is widely available in any anarchist infoshop or bookstore, along with their contemporary, Cornelius Castoriadis and other members of the Socialisme ou Barbarie group, and historical material on the French near revolution of ’68. Notably missing in most such bookstores is any significant space for most of what in France has come to be referred to as “’68 thought”: Deleuze, Foucault, or Baudrillard—those authors seen as representing radical French thought in the academy. Essentially, punks and revolutionaries are still reading French theory from immediately before ’68, the academics are mainly reading theory from immediately afterwards, much of which consists of a prolonged reflection on what went wrong, most often, concluding that revolutionary dreams are impossible (Starr 1995).
Punk, of course, is designed to be somewhat off-putting for the uninitiated. This makes it difficult for the outsider to notice that—despite the violent, angry, over-amplified aesthetic—it effectively played the same cultural role for white urban youth of the late 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, as folk music did in the 1950s and 1960s—as a kind of stripped down, anyone-can-do-it music of the people. It also played a similar political role. The spirit is best summed up in the late 1970s punk zine cited by Dick Hebdige (1979:123), which provided a little finger chart of three chords and the caption, “now go form a band and do it yourself.” DIY became the basic punk credo. Make your own fashion. Form your own band. Refuse to be a consumer. If possible, become a dumpster diver and don’t buy anything. If possible, refuse wage labor. Do not submit to the logic of exchange. Reuse and redeploy fragments of the spectacle and commodity system to fashion artistic weapons to subvert it.
One might say, in fact, that there are two intellectual streams that emerged from the period of May ’68 in France that are still alive in the US and English-speaking world: the pre-1968 revolutionary strain, kept alive in zines, anarchist infoshops, and the Internet, and the post-1968 strain, largely despairing of the possibility of a mass-based, organized revolution, kept alive in graduate seminars, academic conferences, and scholarly journals. The first tends to recognize capitalism as an all-encompassing symbolic system that creates extreme forms of human alienation, but sees it as possible to rebel against it in the name of pleasure, desire, and the potential autonomy of the human subject. The second tends to see the system (whether it is now labeled capitalism, power, discourse, etc.) as so all-encompassing that it is constitutive of the desiring subject him- or herself, rendering any critique of alienation, or possibility of a revolution against the system itself, effectively impossible. At the risk of editorializing (though in this context, it would be dishonest to pretend I could possibly do anything else), the situation is full of endless ironies. The Situationists argued that the system renders us passive consumers, but issued a call to actively resist. The current radical academic orthodoxy seems to either reject either the first part or the second: that is, either it argues that there is no system imposed on consumers, or that resistance is impossible. The first has long been most popular: since the early 1980s, in fact, anyone who makes a Situationist-style argument in an academic forum can expect to be instantly condemned as puritanical and elitist for suggesting consumers are allowing themselves to be passively manipulated. Rather, consumers are creatively reinterpreting consumer styles, fashions, and products in all sorts of subversive ways (e.g., Miller 1987, 1995). In other words, ordinary folks are already practicing detournment.
The great irony here is that this emerging orthodoxy, which quickly became the mainstay of cultural studies (and later, anthropology), it was strictly confined to the academy. Cultural studies tracts were rarely, if ever, read by the ‘ordinary folk’ in question, while Situationist literature, which by these standards was the most elitist position possible, actually does have a certain popular audience. The Revolution of Everyday Life (Vaneigem 1967), for example, is almost never assigned in courses or cited in academic texts, but it’s just as regularly read by college-age radicals now as it was thirty years ago. It all rather confirms that, as my friend Eric Laursen once suggested to me, the reason Situationism can’t be integrated in the academy is simply because “it cannot be read as anything but a call to action.” This is, of course, precisely what makes it so popular with activists. Situationism, with its total rejection of the system, its call for militant artistic interventions, its faith that these might ultimately contribute to social revolution, is the perfect philosophy for an activist first drawn to punk by a feeling of profound alienation from mass society, and determined to do something about it.
Another effect of this rift is that the academy has, starting with the post-1968 thinkers in France, largely jettisoned the idea of “alienation.” Without either a unified subject, or any notion of more natural or authentic relation of that subject with the world and other people, older theories seemed naïve and indefensible. The term disappeared in much social theory. Insofar as it was retained, it was in certain branches of sociology where alienation became something that could be statistically formalized and measured in questionnaires: leading quickly to the conclusion that the most alienated (isolated, angry) members of society were the most marginal (undocumented aliens, for example, or members of oppressed minorities). Partly as a result, alienation has come to be seen as the psychological experience of oppression: modern studies of the subject speak of “racial alienation,” “gender alienation,” alienation based on sexual identity or poverty, and so on (Schmidt & Moody 1994, Geyer & Heinz 1992, Geyer 1996). This in itself helps explain the continuing appeal of ’60s theorists: everything now is cast in terms of exclusion from mainstream society. Alienation is a measure of this exclusion. This is, however, essentially a liberal conception. The power of the older view of alienation was to insist that it is not just a matter of exclusion, but that there is something profoundly, fundamentally wrong with the mainstream itself. That even the winners are ultimately miserable, at least, compared with what they could be in a free, egalitarian society. Anarchists—at least, those who cannot claim to come from some oppressed group—are left with a visceral feeling of rage and rejection against a system that seems both all-encompassing and monstrous, and an official intellectual culture which can offer no theoretical explanation of why they should feel that way.
I’ve taken up some of the questions elsewhere. In an earlier essay on anarchism (Graeber 2003:337), for example, I asked why it was that even when there is next to no other constituency for revolutionary politics, one still finds revolutionary artists, writers, and musicians. My conclusion: that there must be some kind of link between the experience of non-alienated labor, of imagining things and then bringing them into being, and the ability to imagine social alternatives. I concluded by suggesting that revolutionary coalitions might always be said to rely on a kind of alliance between society’s least alienated and its most oppressed (and that revolutions actually happen when these two categories largely coincide). This would, at least, help explain why it almost always seems to be peasants and craftsmen—or even more, newly proletarianized former peasants and craftsmen—who actually overthrow capitalist regimes, and not those inured to generations of wage labor—or, alternately, the otherwise puzzling fact that so many teenagers can be led from the experience of moshing in punk clubs to conclude that their own freedom is intimately tied to the fate of impoverished Tzeltal-speaking farmers in Chiapas.
Still, this formulation remains more than a little crude. Probably, the real opposition should be between those brought to radical politics in a revolt against alienation, and those who are revolting against oppression. Obviously, it’s not as if there are many for whom it is simply one or the other. Still, from the activist’s perspective, there are very good reasons not to abandon the distinction entirely. Without it, it would be impossible to argue that revolutionary change would be in the interest of everyone, even those who cannot be said to be in any way oppressed. On the other hand, one would hardly wish to argue that the despair of a wealthy suburban teenager in the US, faced with a life of soulless consumerism, has quite the same moral weight as, say, the despair of a poor Mozambiquan teenager slowly dying of a preventable disease. It is precisely this dilemma, I think, that leads to the endless tensions and recriminations that haunt activist life.
A society that denies us every adventure makes its own abolition the only possible adventure. —Reclaim the Streets slogan
If one sees capitalism as a gigantic meaningless engine of endless expansion that reduces the majority of the planet’s inhabitants to hopeless poverty, that reduces even its beneficiaries to lonely isolated atoms doomed by fear and insecurity to lives of mind-numbing work and meaningless consumerism, even as it threatens the destruction of the planet—but if at the same time, one does not wish to, or does not believe it possible to simply flee the system, but rather wishes to stay and fight—then what precisely can one do? What sort of social relations is it possible to create among those who wish to make their lives a refusal of the very logic of capitalism, even as they necessarily remain inside it?
The logic of bohemian life has always been an attempt to answer this. It has always tended towards both the cultivation of adventure, danger, and extreme forms of experience, but at the same time, of relations of mutual aid and trust between those pursuing it—even, often, those who might otherwise be strangers. This is precisely the sensibility one encounters in direct actions too.
Consider again the idea of a mosh pit, in which dancers hurl themselves into one another, or stage-dive into the crowd. It’s a matter of both creating dangerous, even violent situations, but at the same time, placing an almost blind faith in surrounding strangers—for help and support—since, after all, if they did not catch or buffer you, you might well end up with a broken neck. In principle, the logic of play aggression and ultimate trust has much in common with the sadomasochism that is constantly alluded to (though rarely practiced) in the punk aesthetic. It’s the kind of pleasure that arises from adventure: excitement, unpredictability, faith, and reliance on one’s companions—which can only be real with the endless possibility of betrayal. At the same time, though, it is anything but an ethos of machismo. One thing that struck me very quickly in becoming involved in anarchist circles was the acceptance of physical frailty.
Most activists do not seem incredibly physically fit—certainly not athletes. They tend to be wiry, occasionally fat, but almost never muscular. “Scrawny vegans” as the stereotype goes. (Famous LA newspaper comment during the DNC protests in 2000: “There were twice as many police as demonstrators; or if you count by weight, four times as many.” Similarly from the other side in the “anarchist guide to LA,” published at the same time: “the athletic-looking guy dressed like a Hollywood version of a punk rocker who’s urging you to attack the cops—he is a cop.” In other words, one way to detect an infiltrator is sheer physical fitness. This despite the fact that many have, as one might expect, plenty of outdoorsy skills and experience, climbing trees and walls and that sort of thing. Hippies with their hiking boots and trail mixes tend to be more fit than punks: they are at least wiry and resilient. This is especially surprising at first when you first get to know Black Bloc kids, who in the press are supposed to be the “violent” ones and who, even among activists, have been called “the marines of our movement,” and discover they’re mostly a bunch of shy, ectomorphic teenagers. They, of course, are also the most likely to be vegans. I suspect this is one thing that must really complicate relations with the police, since they are probably exactly the kind of kids that those grade school kids who were later to become cops used to bully.[46]
The curious emphasis on weakness seems echoed by the marked concern for people with disabilities and medical conditions taking part in actions that I—like most newcomers, I think—at first found rather disconcerting. There were endless discussions in legal trainings of what to expect if arrested and in need of insulin, or AIDS medication, or a host of other conditions. “Will the police let you keep your medicine? No. They are supposed to supply you with medicine from a police medic, but usually don’t. What about hypoglycemics?” (There was a widely circulated story about a hypoglycemic woman at A16 who went into a sugar-fit and ended up arrested when she grabbed someone’s cell phone thinking it was her own.) The obvious first reaction, which most neophytes have to suppress, is what is a diabetic AIDS patient even doing putting him- or herself in the way of tear gas, truncheons, and arrest in the first place? But it’s a combination of the obvious desire to be maximally open with, I suspect, a covert sense that, if one is engaged in a moral contest with police, weakness can be strength. We must force them to be humanitarians!
Combined with the endless food taboos, all this makes for a kind of maze of barriers: some people are vegetarian, some are vegan, others are allergic to nightshades or suffer from environmental illness, many seem very close to hypochondria with endless real or imaginary ailments. Yet these same people often live some of the most adventurous lives imaginable.
Then we can get into the phenomenology of backrubs, like the chain backrubs in the break from facilitation training. Holding hands or linking arms in human chains. General patterns of touching: ordinary Americans almost never touch each other. Anarchists seem especially fond of hugs (though some, Crusty Canadians from CLAC have been known to bemusedly ask us New Yorkers whether we’ve been corrupted by California Starhawk types with all this touchy-feely nonsense), people leaning on each other, holding hands. From very early on, at the legal training in DC, I noticed how much of this: all the trainings involved physical contact, from carrying people off limp, to just sitting pressed up against others in overcrowded rooms.
I wonder if one reason for the touchy/food finicky/embracing weakness aspects is the prominence of women in the movement—though this is slightly confusing, since women are almost never a majority in large meetings and often make up at best a third of the people in the room. On the other hand, they often include the most prominent organizers and participants. Is it better to say that feminine sensibilities pervade, or, that the style of interaction consensus process tends to encourage draws on sensibilities that have, in the United States, historically been associated with the way women interact with one another than with the way men do; or, for that matter, with the way men interact with women? It is largely, but not strictly, desexualized. Often the feeling, at least if one is not part of some sexual identity group, is that one should act (at least in public) as if sex is not particularly important, just one possible aspect of a more general common physicality.
Obviously, all of this varies from one subculture to another. For many years at ABC No Rio, an anarchist social center in the Lower East Side, there was—aside from the usual zine magazine, computers, and the like—a weight room used by members of a group called RASH, the “Red Anarchist Skinheads.” But subcultural groups are always defining themselves against one another.
The play of desire and mutual dependence reappears on all sorts of subtle levels. Here’s an extract from the same notebook, not long after:
A lot of activists smoke. Most older ones seem to have smoked at some time in their lives. I always found it a bit incongruous, at A16, to see all these idealistic kids blockading the streets with cigarettes hanging out of their mouths; especially, teenage girls sitting around bumming cigarettes from each other. But this is actually rather appropriate, because it creates a constant mobilization of feelings of need, discipline, sharing, and desire (the “community of addiction,” as I used to call it, that binds all smokers). Usually for every three or four activists who smoke, or might, there’s one who actually has a pack. Kevin was cast in this role with Scully et al. last week. The distribution of cigarettes, lighting them off others, etc., becomes a constant willed collapse of autonomy—me, when I used to smoke, it was a matter of principle never to allow myself to be trapped in a situation where I’d run out and wasn’t in a position to buy more, but here it’s the opposite. One is dependent on communal good will and sharing for what one really desires most urgently in the world, at least at that moment.
Especially large proportions of vegans smoke.
It rather reminds me of a story I heard about Martin Luther King. He was actually a chain smoker, but was convinced early on it would convey the wrong lesson to the nation’s youth to ever be seen smoking in public. Endless discipline, but with endless desire lurking behind the public facade. Needless to say, no one smokes in meetings, or indoors at all. Thus, the end of a meeting is usually followed by clusters of people immediately running out to smoke, sitting on the concrete to roll tobacco, bumming butts from one another, people just taking a few puffs off someone else’s or passing individual cigarettes around.
Other drugs seem to play a less prominent role because they aren’t so addictive. Therefore, the whole dynamic of desire and community doesn’t enter in. My notes in this case continued:
This varies by scene. Pot is occasional, but surprisingly infrequent. It’s used roughly to the degree one would expect from any young people of the same class or socioeconomic background. Beer is quite a bit, often at bars. Ecstasy is popular among the raver types with which there’s a definite overlap with certain parts of the activist scene. Of course, during street actions, drugs are totally bad news and you’re always reminded not to bring any: “Even if you ditch a joint the moment the cops appear, someone’s going to get it pinned on them.” So bringing drugs to an action would be an act of total lack of solidarity. For an activist to show up completely drunk, or completely stoned, at an action is taken as either a sign no one would possibly want to be in an affinity group with them or, in my experience, most often, as a sign that activist in question is personally falling apart and needs help. As for drug paranoia, there are all sorts of levels of context and historical experience: I am reminded of the time I made a beverage run while showing a film with some former Black Panthers. When I suggested I pick up some Coke, one startled woman immediately corrected me: “Please! Say ‘Coca Cola!’” These were, obviously people used to constant surveillance at a time when drug busts commonly landed activists in jail. I’ve never heard anything like that amongst anarchists nowadays: paranoia is directed at other things. In fact, at minor events, or street party-style actions that are halfway to raves anyway, attitudes towards drugs can be very relaxed. One friend told me a long story about being searched and locked in jail overnight after the RTS Times Square event only to discover, after he got out, that he’d forgotten he’d had a joint in his shoe the whole time. But these are “Temporary Autonomous Zones” of a rather different sort.
The one theme that recurs endlessly in all of this is “autonomy”: simultaneously the greatest anarchist value, and the greatest dilemma. Certain forms of autonomy—the isolated individualism of mainstream American society, with its solitary pleasures—are precisely that against which one is rebelling. Or, perhaps, one might say, the question is how to balance autonomy, solidarity, and freedom. Cornelius Castoriadis (1987, 1991), for example, defined “autonomy” as the ability of a community to live only under rules they had themselves collectively created, and had the right to reexamine constantly. For many anarchists, freedom appears to mean the ability to create new communities, and ties of mutual dependence, more or less on the spot, and to move back and forth between them as one wishes. An action, a party, a picnic, a dance, can all be temporary autonomous zones where desires coalesce and the leap of faith involved in trusting strangers itself becomes a large part of the adventure—even when police are not present, which, as we shall see, is rarely, since police have a notable tendency to show up whenever anarchists get together. The dilemmas, though, become much more acute when attempts are made—as they regularly are—to turn TAZs into PAZs, to move from temporary to more permanent zones of autonomy.
In the next section then let me talk a little about more permanent activist spaces. As we’ll see, these are almost never quite, entirely, permanent. Every space has to be, to some degree, conquered, and most are almost instantly besieged.
In a city like New York, anarchist spaces often have the quality of an archipelago. Certain neighborhoods contain relatively dense clusters of squats, community gardens, social or community centers, radical bookstores/infoshops, and other more-or-less friendly institutions: co-ops, vegetarian restaurants, second-hand bike shops, avant-garde theaters, friendly churches, or even caf és and bars where activists are likely to be found hanging out.
Sometimes there’s a center to them; sometimes they’re more diffuse. Between the beginning of 2000 and the end of 2001, the heyday of New York City DAN, there was a very much a center for the activist scene in New York’s Lower East Side. This was a local community center called Charas El Bohio, located inside a former schoolhouse. Charas El Bohio stood at the center of a nexus of institutions almost all of which had been won by prolonged community struggle.
The story of Charas is quite interesting. Technically, “Charas” was the name of a community group—“El Bohio” referred to the building. The community group had been fou
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line888
|
__label__cc
| 0.554859
| 0.445141
|
Danny Danon, Israeli Ambassador To UN, Looks Back On His Past Five Years Of Service
Jul 3, 2020 | World
In an online conversation earlier this week that was hosted by Matthew Bronfman, chair of the International Steering Committee of Limmud FSU, Israel’s outgoing ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, reviewed his five years of service.
NEW YORK, NY, July 03, 2020 /24-7PressRelease/ — In an online conversation earlier this week that was hosted by Matthew Bronfman, chair of the International Steering Committee of Limmud FSU, Israel’s outgoing ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, reviewed his five years of service and noted with satisfaction that he broke new ground by becoming the first Israeli ambassador to be elected to chair one of the United Nations’ standing committees. “Future ambassadors to the UN can aspire to something similar.”
Interviewed by the President of JCS International Michal Grayevsky, Danon, who before his ambassadorial posting had served as Israel’s science minister and deputy defense minister, as well as deputy speaker of the Knesset (Israeli parliament), noted with great satisfaction that in a secret ballot, many UN members who publicly speak against Israel, actually voted for him to lead the Legal Committee.
Limmud FSU generally mounts peer-led, volunteer-based gatherings of Jewish learning that specifically reach out to Russian-speaking Jews around the world from Moscow to the US West Coast, and from Europe to Israel. Yet in a project initiated by Limmud FSU founder Chaim Chesler, and produced by Limmud FSU deputy director Natasha Chechik, since the corona lockdown made physical conferences impossible, Limmud FSU has been providing digital e-learning opportunities on Jewish, general – and coronavirus – topics. Sessions have also been arranged by volunteer organizing committees of the festivals. These online gatherings are an opportunity for Russian-speaking Jews to learn – and be – together, virtually.
Indeed, comparing and contrasting diplomacy in the UN to the Israeli Knesset, Danon pointed out that “diplomacy is quiet and long term. Politicians want credit immediately for what they do, while diplomats should never take credit. In the Knesset people say negative things about you behind closed doors while in public they are nice to you; in contrast, in the UN, countries actually admire Israel quietly, while condemning it in public.” Of the 193 member states of the United Nations, Danon noted, Israel has official relations with over 160, and quiet relations with many of the other states. “I have encouraged the leaders of these countries to stop hiding and publicly declare their relations with Israel,” he said.
Where relations with such countries are concerned, Danon also noted, in response to a question from Matthew Bronfman, that while Israel is concerned but not fearful about the Iranian threat, “Gulf states are fearful.” Precisely an important element of his work at the UN, he said, is ensuring that Iran not be allowed to become a strong promoter of instability, pointing to such positive signs of success as the decision by the German government to outlaw Hezbollah, “a proxy of Iran,” and stressing that on this issue, too, Israel must work closely with the Gulf states.
There is clear interconnection between Israel’s position in the UN and its relations with the US, stressed Danon, commenting that, “as long as we have the support of the US in the UN Security Council, we can be relaxed.”
Turning his attention from the United Nations and international organizations to Israel, Danon was asked to comment on Israel’s plans for annexing parts of the West Bank. “You cannot annex what is yours,” he stated categorically; “we are extending Israeli sovereignty, in just the same way as Menachem Begin, in 1981, passed a law in the Knesset to advance Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. From whom would we be annexing parts of the West Bank?”
Acknowledging that Israel has “a dispute with the Palestinians,” and that it welcomes negotiations to resolve that dispute, Danon argued that the Israeli government must make a decision about what it wants to do, and then deal with whatever international criticism might arise. “Most of the world is not dealing with the Middle East today,” he noted; “countries are busy with the corona pandemic and the related economic crisis.” Israel, he said, “must not take decisions based on what if or whether now is the right timing. The government must decide what it wants to achieve.” It has, he suggested, a window of opportunity over the summer months to discuss and take a decision. “It must not be done in the immediate lead up to or first months after the November presidential elections in the US.” Danon rejected suggestions that the government should take into consideration opposition from some groups of Diaspora Jewry. “World Jewry must respect Israeli democracy and our processes, even if they don’t agree with what we are doing.”
In response to a question by Limmud FSU founder Chaim Chesler, Danon commented on the decision pending in the International Criminal Court on alleged crimes by Israel in the West Bank. “This is not a real tribunal,” he said; “it’s a political maneuver,” pointing out that the court ignores atrocities around the world while examining issues related to Israel. President of Limmud FSU, Aaron G. Frenkel, also took part in the special meeting.
Summing up his five years in New York, Danon recalled with Limmud FSU co-founder, Sandy Cahn, that one of his first public appearances when he arrived at the UN was at a Limmud FSU New York Shabbaton, and it was with alacrity that he accepted an invitation to appear at the Limmud FSU non-virtual, annual festival in Israel, due to take place, corona virus situation permitting, in December.
PreviousPatreon and American Council of the Blind Announce Digital Accessibility Initiative
NextNigerian Afropop’s Most Promising Diaspora Artist Releases New Single “Highness”
30 Years Later: Israeli Mother Reunited with Long-Lost Son Trapped in Gaza
Shincheonji Church Gives Record-Breaking Plasma Donation as Bill Gates Joins Korea in the Race for the COVID-19 Vaccine
[PangyoTechnoValley] Global Company selects Kakao Blockchain Subsidiary Ground X
Qatari Company Made it to an International Ranking of the World’s Leading Contractors
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line889
|
__label__wiki
| 0.782014
| 0.782014
|
All posts tagged heavenly sword
My Top Games of the 2000’s
Posted in: Blogs. Tagged: 'splosion man, 000, 2, 2000's, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, a crack in time, a spy in h.a.r.m.'s way, a spy in harms way, a-spec, advanced warfighter, alien, allied assault, among thieves, anniversary, arctic edge, area 51, arkham asylum, assassin's creed, assassin's creed ii, avp2, batman, battlefront ii, beyond good & evil, bioshock, borderlands, brothers in arms, brutal legend, bully, burnout 3, call of cthulhu, call of duty 3, call of duty 4, chains of olympus, challenge of the warlords, chinatown wars, chrono trigger, civilization iii, cod2, cod3, cod4, combat evolved, condemned, criminal origins, crisis core, crysis, dante's awakening, dark corners of the earth, dark mirror, dawn of war, dead space, deception, def jam, devil may cry 3, dirt, dmc3, doom 3, dragon age, ds, dub edition, empire at war, episode 1, escape from butcher bay, eternal darkness, eternal sonata, extraction, f.e.a.r., fable, fable ii, fallout 3, fear, fight for ny, final fantasy vii, final fantasy x, first encounter assault recon, freekstyle, frontline, galaxy, gears of war, gears of war 2, ghost recon, ghostbusters, god of war, gran turismo 3, grand theft auto iii, grand theft auto iv, gta3, gtaiv, guild wars, guitar hero, guitar hero ii, guitar hero iii, guns of the patriots, half-life 2, half-minute hero, halo, halo 2, heavenly sword, katamari damacy, killzone 2, kingdom hearts, kingdom hearts ii, knights of the old republic, kotor, left 4 dead 2, legend, legends of rock, mass effect, max payne, medal of honor, metal gear solid 3, metal gear solid 4, metroid prime, midnight club 3, mirror's edge, modern warfare, modern warfare 2, mortal kombat, most wanted, motorstorm, my top games, need for speed, nemesis, no one lives forever 2, oblivion, okami, origins, pacific assault, paper mario, phantom hourglass, predator, prey, prince of persia, pro skater 2, pro skater 3, psi-ops, psychonauts, pure, puzzle quest, rainbow six, ratchet & clank, ratchet & clank future, reign of chaos, remix, republic commando, resident evil 3, resident evil 4, resident evil 5, ridge racer, road to hill 30, rock band 2, rollercoaster tycoon 3, san andreas, sanity's requiem, season of flame, season of ice, shadow of the colossus, shaolin monks, shivering isles, silent hill, silent hill 2, skate 2, socom, socom 2, socom ii, special edition, spider-man 2, splinter cell, spyro 2, star wars, subsistence, super mario, super paper mario, swat 4, syphon filter, takedown, tesiv, the chronicles of riddick, the darkness, the elder scrolls iv, the incredible hulk, the legend of zelda, the lord of the rings, the lost and damned, the lost chapters, the mindgate conspiracy, the return of the king, the sands of time, the suffering, the two towers, the video game, tom clancy's, tomb raider, tony hawk's, top games, torchlight, tron 2.0, u.s. navy seals, ultimate destruction, uncharted 2, underground, underworld, unreal tournament, us navy seals, vegas, vs, warcraft iii, warhammer 40, warrior within, wwii. Leave a comment
I did my top games of the 2010’s and it got me all nostalgic for games I actually grew up with. I might later do my top games of the 90’s, but the 2000’s were very memorable to me thanks to the PS2 dominating the first half of that decade. I wasn’t so much a PC gamer until around 2005, and even then, I was playing older games as I didn’t have a gaming PC until 2010. This topic will mostly focus on console and handhelds games. So, if you don’t see a Zelda game on here you know was amazing it’s not because I didn’t like it, I probably never was able to play it even to this day. Games like Citizens: Kabuto or Hitman 2 were great games, but I just never played them. So, in light of all this, this isn’t a “Overall Best Games of the 2000’s” as you will see.
I will also not be putting any mobile games in here, while I had the first Droid phone in 2009, it was too late in the decade and too early for Android to make anything all that great. I did have an iPod Touch, but mobile gaming hadn’t quite evolved into anything special, even on Apple’s devices. Sure, there were fun and interesting games, but it wasn’t anything to write home about. Resident Evil 4 and Rock Band were a blast, but the console versions were much better.
Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 2 – 2000
GameBoy Color – PlayStation – Nintendo 64 – PC – Dreamcast
Remastered: No | Best Played On: Xbox
While Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater was revolutionary, the second game pushed it over the edge. More of everything, better graphics, and it just overall felt more polished and better than the first game. I played this more than the first, and was a frequent rental on both PS1 and N64.
Resident Evil 3: Nemesis – 2000
Dreamcast – PlayStation – PC – GameCube
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: GameCube
While I didn’t play this game until years after it was released, the Dreamcast version is by far the best (outside of the GameCube release) for the earlier versions. Cleaner graphics, better framerate, and it’s for the Dreamcast! It was a well polished end to a great trilogy, and while not very scary, it was tense and kept you on your toes.
Paper Mario – 2000
Remastered: No | Best Played On: Wii U
Paper Mario caught everyone’s eye because it was an RPG and it wasn’t your standard platformer. My sister actually rented this and I got sucked in watching. When I finally finished the game I didn’t want it to end. While it was a very simple and rather easy game it was fun and enjoyable and had JRPG elements everyone could enjoy.
PlayStation – PlayStation 2 – Nintendo 64 – PC – GameCube – Xbox – Mac
This is by far my favorite game in the series. It was the first PS2 game I ever touched and I couldn’t put it down. I stayed up playing this all night at friends’ sleepovers and mastered this game. Ever level, used every cheat, and got 100% in the game. It’s a masterpiece and remains one of the best sports game ever made, period.
Grand Theft Auto III – 2001
PlayStation 2 – PC – Xbox
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: Xbox
This game made me jealous I didn’t have a PS2. I had a neighbor who had a PS2 and he always left his door open and I would walk by and see him playing this Silent Hill 2 and SSX. When I finally got a hold of it I realized I was holding one of the most controversial games ever made. It had fantastic writing, fun gameplay, and one of the first large open worlds on a console.
Halo: Combat Evolved – 2001
Xbox – PC – Mac
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: PC
What can you say about Halo? It’s Microsoft’s Zelda or Mario. It was the beginning of an era and online shooters would never be the same. It’s not just one of the most iconic games ever made, but one of Microsoft’s only standing exclusives they have left. I actually played this on PC first, but I saw this game on gaming sites and magazines on a daily basis for years.
Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec – 2001
Remastered: No | Best Played On: N/A
GT3 is by far one of the best racing simulators ever made, even to this day. The physics and graphics hold up so well and it was well beyond its time. I got gold in nearly ever race and almost bought every single car. I spent dozens of hours in this game with my dad and couldn’t put it down. It still remains the best in the series and one of the best PS2 games of all time.
Civilization III – 2001
PC – Mac
Remastered: No | Best Played On: PC
This was a small game I bought from a school book fair a few years after it had released. It was only $20 so I grabbed it as I loved Age of Empire II. I got sucked in right away and played this on a 5 year old computer that couldn’t run anything else. I became a Civilization fan after that.
Max Payne – 2001
PlayStation 2 – Xbox – PC – Mac – GameBoy Advance
While I played the inferior PS2 version when it was released I still had a blast with this game. The crying baby scene where you are running on the line of blood was a serious pain in the ass and I remember my mom yelling at me to mute the TV. The bullet time gameplay was otherworldly and the gritty comics and voice acting was top notch. Years later I played a better port on PC.
Silent Hill 2 – 2001
I never played this on PS2, but the PC version was fantastic and also scary as sin. The puzzles were a little vague, but the game was grotesque and strange, just how I remembered the first game being. While the story is convoluted, and the gameplay is stiff, you can’t knock the game for the sheer amount of weirdness it throws at you.
Alien vs Predator 2 – 2001
Played years after release, the game was one of the best PC shooters I had ever played and was actually scary! The Alien and Marine campaign stood out the most for me, and it looked pretty good to. I never had a chance to play online, but the campaigns have great replay value and are worth checking out to this day.
Final Fantasy X – 2002
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: PlayStation 4/Xbox One
Funny story about this game. I rented this from Blockbuster and the disc had a scratch that prevented me from getting past the cut-scene that showed Sin just before attacking the boat. I returned it and didn’t finish it until years later. It was the first FF game I ever was able to beat and had an engaging story that was quite memorable, great locales, and gorgeous visuals.
Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell – 2002
PlayStation 2 – Xbox – PC – Mac – GameCube
While I played the inferior PS2 version, Splinter Cell got me into stealth games as Metal Gear Solid just couldn’t quite do it for me. The lighting was amazing, and the the controls and animations were awesome. I loved how you could actually see how dark everything is around you and that would determine how hidden you are. The level design was great, but it could also be a tad difficult.
Eternal Darkness: Sanity’s Requiem – 2002
While not the best GameCube game it was so oddball I couldn’t stop playing. I remember something about an Indiana Jones artifact recovery thing, strange puzzles, and just a bizarre story in general. It’s a hidden gem, and I played it years after release, but there’s nothing else like it on a Nintendo system. It’s a must play.
WarCraft III: Reign of Chaos – 2002
Score: 8.5/10
I played this longer after release, it was one of the best real time strategy games I had ever played. It was fun, simple, had great visuals, and a story and characters were fun to watch. The campaign was well done with great scenarios, and it has replay value for sure. The collector’s edition is currently sitting on my shelf.
Medal of Honor: Allied Assault – 2002
I was late to the Medal of Honor game as I skipped the first outings on PlayStation. Allied Assault took the PC community by storm with fantastic visuals and great gameplay. I played this after Finest Hour for PS2 came out and realized what I was missing out on. The best Medal of Honor games are on PC.
No One Lives Forever 2: A Spy in H.A.R.M.’s Way – 2002
This is by far one of the most original shooters ever made. It’s a spoof on 60’s spy movies like James Bond. The clever writing, great humor, interesting characters, and funny gadgets used in the game just keep you hooked. This was one of my first FPS games on PC and it made me realize that PC has some of the best shooters on the planet.
Ratchet & Clank – 2002
Remastered: Yes| Best Played On: PlayStation 3
Ratchet & Clank aren’t just some low budget mascots like Bubsy. These are Sony’s, and PlayStation’s, icons and also some of the best platforming you will ever find even to this day. While the sequels were equally as charming, the first game made the largest impact on me, and it’s the only one I played, thanks to its witty humor, great characters, and memorable levels. This game also put Insomniac on the map for being fantastic weapons designers and their famous unique alt fire modes.
Medal of Honor: Frontline – 2002
PlayStation 2 – Xbox – GameCube
This was the first ever Medal of Honor experience I had. I had played a demo of the original back when it came out, but it was boring to me as a kid. Frontline blew my mind away when the opening scene of the Normandy beach on D-Day rattled my TV speakers. While today, it’s rather dull and not very interesting, Frontline was back-to-consoles basics, and looked good doing it.
Kingdom Hearts – 2002
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: PlayStation 4
Disney plus Final Fantasy was something no one saw coming and I was so exciting reading about this game in magazines and online articles up until release. I didn’t pick this up until nearly 2 years after release, but when I did I had a blast. Revisiting old Disney favorites with my siblings was so much fun, and the the characters were great despite not being able to follow any of the story. Admit it, we played it so we could Final Fantasy inside Christmas Town.
SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs – 2002
My first ever online console experience. I was late to the game on this one, but I picked up a network adapter just for this game and spent dozens of hours online. It made me love online shooters on consoles, I never finished the campaign and solely focused on fragging online which is fine right?
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers – 2002
PlayStation 2 – Xbox – GameCube – GameBoy Advance
As a kid, The Lord of the Rings movies were part of my universe. I watched them in the theaters and rewatched on DVD. I couldn’t get enough. The games were nearly perfect recreating the scenes of the movies with tight controls, a fun upgrade system, and great visuals. They have great replay value to this day.
Freekstyle – 2002
PlayStation 2 – GameCube
Remastered: No | Best Played On: GameCube
Out of all the motorcycle games that were a huge deal in the early 2000’s, Freekstyle won me over, mainly as I picked it up on a budget and loved the high octane tricks and crazy arenas. I got obsessed trying to get the highest scores on all the races and played this for dozens of hours.
Spyro 2: Season of Flame/Ice – 2002
Some of the finest mobile platforming is right here, and it’s all thanks to the isometric view rather than cramming terrible 3D visuals onto the system. The clever level design, tight controls, and classic Spyro gameplay we have grown to love was in handheld form. This was one of the few GBA games I owned growing up and I couldn’t get enough.
Metroid Prime – 2002
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: Wii
I played this many years after release, and I didn’t like it then, but now I’ve grown to appreciate the game and series overall. Metroid took awhile to grow on me and sadly this is the only game in the series I ever touched. I finished it, shrugged, and tossed it aside, but after loving the series like I do know, I will someday go back and play all three.
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic – 2003
Another game played many years after release, KOTOR is considered by many to be the best Star Wars game ever made. With an original story not following the movies, great RPG battles, lightsaber customization, good writing, voice acting, and more Star Wars lore than you can shake a stick at. It looked fantastic and remains one of the best Xbox games as well.
Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time – 2003
PlayStation 2 – Xbox – GameCube – PC – GameBoy Advance
Most people had never heard of the Prince before The Sands of Time. Ubisoft’s reboot was an instant hit and classic. Using time rewind skills, great combat, and platforming, this was almost a perfect game. While I didn’t get a chance to play it upon release, I got to play the PC version a couple years later.
Call of Duty – 2003
PC – Mac – N-Gage
Remastered: Yes| Best Played On: Xbox 360/PlayStation 3
Considered by many to be the best WWII franchise, Call of Duty set higher standards than even Medal of Honor. Less arcade feel gameplay, more bombastic scripted events, and addictive online play. Call of Duty went on to be a fan favorite and is far different from what the series is today.
Tony Hawk’s Underground – 2003
PlayStation 2 – Xbox – GameCube – PC
While THPS4 felt a little mediocre and samey, THUG mixed things up again with an actual story, off board exploration, and a return to amazing level design and overall fun that the series was known for. This was the end of an era as later games in the series flopped and never felt the same.
SOCOM II: U.S. Navy SEALs – 2003
The last SOCOM game I would ever play, the campaign was a lot better, visuals improved, and the online gameplay was even more fun, but for some reason a lot harder. The first game felt a little more arcade like and SOCOM II took a very realistic approach to shooting. I was too young to really care, but I appreciated it nonetheless.
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King – 2003
PlayStation 2 – Xbox – GameCube – GameBoy Advance – PC – Mac
The last of the two great Lord of the Rings games, and the last of any good game in the series for at least a decade. Return of the King bumped up the visuals and gave us all the great scenes in the movies to play with unlockable clips, behind the scenes, and more. It was nearly a perfect action game and has great replayability to this day.
Tron 2.0 – 2003
I loved Tron growing up as a kid, and when I found out this game released on PC I was excited. While it didn’t run well, Tron 2.0 was a mind trip. It felt like you were in the movie, and despite being difficult, it had a lot of great gameplay and some nice RPG elements thrown in. It felt like a true adventure and like I was slowly getting towards my goals and growing as a whole.
Beyond Good & Evil – 2003
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: PlayStation 3/Xbox 360
I played this years after release on PC at about 20FPS, but I played it and it was a blast. It was one of the first games I ever bought on Steam back when the store had only a couple hundred games. It felt like a true adventure with great characters, voice acting, and memorable environments.
Half-Life 2 – 2004
PC – Xbox
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: PC/Xbox 360/PlayStation 3
The beginning of an era and FPS games would never be the same. I was barely able to run this game on PC, but it was the first game I ever bought on Steam, back when Valve games were all that were available. I played through the game numerous times and I never experienced anything like this — it was a PC only experience and it showed. While it was bug city, and didn’t run well on older hardware, it was a blast to play and the style of storytelling is something I will never foget.
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas – 2004
PlayStation 2 – Xbox – PC
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: Xbox/PC
One of the most contraversial games ever created, San Andreas took the industry and world by storm. Making it to the 6 o’clock news and then some. I had never had more fun in a game until San Andreas. The story and characters were fun and entertaining, the RPG elements were interesting, and was just good ‘ol GTA that you would screw around in and always find something to do. It rang through the industry long after release too.
Halo 2 – 2004
Xbox – PC
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: Xbox One
I didn’t get a chance to play this until I had an Xbox 360, but when I did I understood why it was such a big deal. Halo 2 was probably the biggest game in 2004 just due to the fact that it was the best online shooter you could play on a console. The story and visuals were top-notch, the campaign was amazing, and who doesn’t love online fragging? I missed out not owning an Xbox, and hated on the game for years, but it remains one of the best games in the series.
Burnout 3: Takedown – 2004
PlayStation 2 – Xbox
Burnout 3 remains one of my favorite racers of all time. The crash mode is all I need to say. Slow down time and rack up points by causing crashes? Who didn’t like that. It was fun, the physics and sense of speed were perfect, and there were a ton of events and it never got old. It remains one of the few perfect racers out there.
Unreal Tournament 2004 – 2004
I was late to the game, but Unreal 2004 was a blast, and actually ran well on my old school PC I used at home. While the campaign was entertaining for practice, I spent hours modding the game with skins, models, and maps, and playing online was never more fun. It still plays well to this day, but I finally had an online shooter I could play daily that had a large community.
The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay – 2004
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: Xbox 360/PlayStation 3/PC
Another reason to own an Xbox or high-end gaming PC. Riddick was a surprise hit that no one expected. It was dark, gritty, had good controls and gameplay, and a decent story with Vin Diesel himself starring in it. I remember my family rented Pitch Black from Blockbuster and the movie included a demo of this game, but alas, no Xbox. I finally played it years later on PC.
Doom 3 – 2004
PC – Xbox – Mac
Remastered: Yes| Best Played On: PC/PlayStation 4/Xbox One
How many more reasons did I need to finally cave and get an Xbox? It wouldn’t even launch on my then 6 year old PC, so I was stuck watching videos online. The game was so awesome, but fans were divided. I eventually played it on Xbox a few years later, but I could understand the hype. It looked so real when I saw it at launch with fantastic lighting effects, and the gore!
Katamari Damacy – 2004
Remastered: Yes| Best Played On: Switch
Not only was it appealing because it was $20, but it was weird and every PS2 owner was talking about it. The low budget Japanese adventure game had you playing as the Prince of Cosmos rolling up random crap into bigger and bigger balls. It was satisfying, fun, had decent controls, and great personality and charm. It shook-up the game industry and was one of the first examples of an indie game that can become really popular.
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War – 2004
One of the best RTS games I have ever played. Period. My parents couldn’t afford to get me the stuff for the board games so the video games was all I had. Dawn of War was the first game set in the Warhammer universe I ever played and I got hooked. The interesting lore, factions, and base building and unit management were top notch with some great expansions as well.
Def Jam: Fight for NY – 2004
PlayStation 2 – Xbox – GameCube – PSP
Love or hate rap music, it is the single most influential music genre on the planet spanning nearly every culture and country. Def Jam turned into an okay fighter into something awesome with Fight for NY. Plenty of East Coast rappers brawling it out with a fantastic fight system.
Psi-Ops: The Mindgate Conspiracy – 2004
Psi-Ops was a weird game, but somehow a sleeper hit. It featured an interesting story with great voice acting, and one of the most questionable cliffhangers ever. Everyone wants a sequel, but it sadly died and went down with Midway. I discovered the band Cold from the music video on the disc at least.
Prince of Persia: Warrior Within – 2004
PlayStation 2 – GameCube – Xbox – PC
This is actually my favorite game in the series. People hated on the darker and grittier game, but I loved it. The awesome metal music, the blood and gore, and darker tones were just awesome to me. Ubisoft took risks that most other developers wouldn’t with a AAA franchise. It had improved combat and some fantastic level design.
Spider-Man 2 – 2004
By far one of the few great movie-game tie-ins that worked. This game had a huge sprawling Manhattan you could explore and the combat system was excellent. Climbing the Empire State Building and diving off was a blast. It made a huge splash back in the day and influenced the new Spider-Man for PS4.
RollerCoaster Tycoon 3 – 2004
A lot of people like roller coasters, but how about taking an already popular simulation game and making it 3D with POV roller coaster rides? It was an absolute blast and I spent countless hours building coasters and riding them in real-time. The park management aspect was something I didn’t care for until I was older, but with an easy to use coaster builder you’re going to set off the imagination of many.
Mortal Kombat: Deception – 2004
This was the first video game I ever pre-ordered and was the first video game I truly got amped up and excited for leading to release. I watched every trailer, clip, screenshot, and article multiple times over. It was also the first ever online fighting game for consoles and had great net code and worked. I spent so many hours fighting online to keep my win ratio up, and was the best of the 3D Mortal Kombat games. It had a fantastic Puzzle Fighter and Chess Kombat mode, but the Konquest mode was complete filler and was awful with terrible controls and visuals, but you had to play through it to unlock stuff in the Krypt.
Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault – 2004
EA took the series back to the PC and the Asia-Pacific theater. It was bombastic, looked amazing thanks to PC hardware, and sadly I didn’t get to play this until almost a decade after release, but I grew to appreciate the game for what it was and how well it was made.
The Suffering – 2004
The Suffering was another game in Midway’s peak just before they declared bankruptcy. Midway had some of the best franchises on the planet and The Suffering wasn’t amazing, but the dark atmosphere, and psychological stuff really got me hooked. It was a hard game and I never finished it, but it’s a great franchise that I wish was picked up again. The inspiration of real-life asylums and prisons is what got me hooked.
Ridge Racer – 2004
When I got my PSP, which remains the only console I ever pre-ordered, it felt like I was holding the future. It remains the slickest portable console ever made, and it was ahead of its time. With PS2 level graphics in your hand, and a fantastic library, the PSP is a must have system. Ridge Racer remains the best game in the series and one of the best racers on PSP. I actually got 100% completion in the game and was so satisfied when I did.
Resident Evil 4 – 2005
PlayStation 2 – GameCube – PC – Wii
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: Xbox One/PlayStation 4
RE4 is by far in my top ten games of all time. It has to be. While GameCube players got the game for a few months it was quickly released on PS2, and not only sold way more there, but a premium edition was released which I have to this day. It didn’t look as good on PS2, but it was still a memorable experience. The 20 hour story was nearly perfect with exciting enemies, great gameplay, and the RE reboot that took over the industry and inspired games like Gears of War after it.
God of War – 2005
Another game in my top ten, God of War shook me to my core. It made me rethink how games should be made and played. The revolutionary combat system, the great use of Greek lore, great voice acting and story, and the huge open vistas with no loading was out of this world. It was gory, exciting, and I replayed it many times over on various other platforms as well.
Guitar Hero – 2005
Guitar Hero was the beginning of an era and a short lived push for rhythm games on consoles. It literally took over the entire world with so many knock-offs and sequels, parties, competitions, and world records. Guitar Hero got me to buy a real guitar and learn to play and it just somehow worked. Sure, the game didn’t have any original tracks, they all had to be cover songs, but they were well done and the game was so addictive. I spent dozens of hours in this game and many of the songs are well known to younger generations because of this game.
Shadow of the Colossus – 2005
Another game that made me see them differently, Shadow of the Colossus didn’t just look like one of the best games ever made at the time, it ran poorly, sure, but it was memorable. Running around and empty wasteland taking down larger than life beasts was unheard of back in the day. The fact that it could be done on the PS2 was astonishing, and with the next-generation of console just around the corner it seemed silly not to wait. What we got was one of the best PlayStation games ever made that has only improved with the recent remaster.
Guild Wars – 2005
My first ever MMO and only because it wasn’t subscription based. With World of Warcraft still dominating the charts and being talked about daily, Guild Wars used it’s free-to-play concept to lure players in. I didn’t understand the concept of an MMO back then, it was complicated, but I got a good way into the story before finally moving on to other things as I didn’t get into the game until much later after release.
Brothers in Arms: Road to Hill 30 – 2005
I played this years after release on PC, but what we had was a WWII shooter that left the arcade gameplay behind and gave us a gritty and gripping story with great voice acting and realistic tactical combat. Not to mention the first WWII game to finally have gore and blood. It was a very tough game, but was so good, just avoid the PS2 version as it runs like garbage.
F.E.A.R.: First Encounter Assault Recon – 2005
PC – Xbox 360
FEAR was probably the first game where I was jealous I didn’t have a gaming PC. You needed a monster rig to run this back in the day, and when I walked into Sam’s Club and glanced over at the video games one day, I finally decided I wanted to be a PC gamer. It is still considered one of the best shooters ever made. I didn’t get to play this until it was released for Xbox 360, but it’s hard, fun, and one of a kind.
Psychonauts – 2005
I played this years after release because the PS2 version is awful, but we got was a charming lovable platformer that is thankfully finally getting a sequel 15 years later. It had great voice acting, fun levels, and a trippy atmosphere.
SWAT 4 – 2005
Being able to slowly walk through a level and yell, “Police! Hands in the air!” and have a button for that is just awesome. The game has so much replay value and being put into small areas with multiple outcomes is addictive. I loved playing through each level and going in with non-lethal approach and then lethal. I tried to get a perfect score in every level. It didn’t run very well on my PC at the time, but it didn’t stop the fun.
The Incredible Hulk: Ultimate Destruction – 2005
I played this long after release, but it is one of the best comic book video games ever made, and for sure the best Hulk game in existence. With a large open world you can smash everything in sight. It had fun missions, lots of Hulk lore, and you felt like a real comic book hero. This was back when comic book games were mostly bad and when a good one came along everyone clung to it.
Devil May Cry 3: Dante’s Awakening – 2005
While most people skipped DMC2, DMC3 came back with a vengeance. It was one of the most talked about games and not only was it hard as nails it was fun, stylish, and looked amazing. I remember beating this game and being incredibly satisfied.
Star Wars Battlefront II – 2005
PlayStation 2 – PSP – Xbox – PC
I prefer this game over the first one as it was louder, bigger, looked better, and just had more content overall. It was a smash hit and one of the best online shooters of the time. It was sadly one of Pandemic’s last games as well.
Fable: The Lost Chapters – 2005
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: Xbox 360
I finally got a chance to play Fable long after release, and when I did I loved it. It has a wonderful British charm, great medieval fantasy atmosphere, and the choice system, combat, and dialog were great. I didn’t have many complaints about this game and it remains an Xbox game that needs to make a return.
Condemned: Criminal Origins – 2005
Xbox 360 – PC
Man this game really takes me back. I remember watching the reveal of the PS3 at E3 2005 live on GameSpot. I remember watching the Condemned tech demo by Sega and being absolutely stunned. This was one of three games I first bought for my Xbox 360. I replayed this game a few times and couldn’t put it down. It’s actually quite scary, tense, and has great combat.
Mortal Kombat: Shaolin Monks – 2005
The last Mortal Kombat spin-off we would ever see, Shaolin Monks had a fantastic fight system, and despite being really short, helped bring MKII to life which is a lot of fan’s favorite game in the series. The voice acting and story were dreadful, but it had great co-op gameplay as well. I still have my action figures that came with the pre-order.
Star Wars: Republic Commando – 2005
I played this on PC long after release, but it’s something in the Star Wars universe that feels unique and rare. It has a great atmosphere, and FPS games in the Star Wars universe are quite rare. It was a solid tactical shooter that sadly didn’t get the attention it deserved.
Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth – 2005
I played this game on a PC that could barely run it, but it got me into HP Lovecraft’s writing. The game wasn’t perfect, but the atmosphere was tense and scary, and it just felt like a great adventure. It was horror at its finest, and there really isn’t anything out there like it. It’s the best Cthulhu game out there, and sadly didn’t get much attention.
Area 51 – 2005
I remember getting really excited for this game up to release. I got it on day one and had a blast. I played through the campaign a few times to get all the collectibles and played online quite a bit. It had a great atmosphere, and featured some AAA voice talent like Marilyn Manson and David Dechovny.
Need for Speed: Most Wanted – 2005
PlayStation 2 – GameCube – Xbox – Xbox 360 – PC – Nintendo DS – PSP
Remastered: No | Best Played On: Xbox 360
I played this game for hours and hours trying to get 100% completion. It wouldn’t run on my PC so later the following year I picked it up cheap and went to town on my 360. I remember playing this for hours listening to my custom soundtracks in the background.
Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence – 2005
This was the fist MGS game I actually beat and could really get into. Snake Eater was fine and all, but I was still too young and impatient to care for it. I loved the story, characters, and gameplay and it looked fantastic as well. In fact, this was the first game I played using component cables for my PS2 and it looked sharp and detailed. I’m still not the biggest MGS fan, but I appreciate the series for what it is.
Kingdom Hearts II – 2005
This was the only video game ending that made me cry. I rented this right when it came out and actually finished it. The first game was too hard for me to beat, but Kingdom Hearts II had more Disney locations and more Final Fantasy characters that I liked. It remains one of the best PS2 games, but the story was so convoluted and confusing.
Gears of War – 2006
Gears of War is in my top ten favorite franchises of all time. This game changed the way I see and play games and was a real stepping stone for true next-generation games. It was one of three games I first played on my 360 and I have beaten it numerous times on every system it has been out for. I’ve read the novels as well and just love the world and characters that this game has. It’s a surprisingly deep rabbit hole of lore and story if you look in other media.
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion – 2006
PlayStation 3 – Xbox 360 – PC
Oblivion holds a special place in my heart. It was the first Elder Scrolls game I ever played and it was the only time from before or after that I sat and did 12 hour gaming marathons. I explored every nook and cranny of this game, read all the in game books, and even tried it on PC. The game is so deep and has so much going for it that it pushed gaming into another generation. Sure, it has flaws like numerous bugs, dated visuals, mediocre combat, and menus aren’t the best, but it was magical nonetheless.
Okami – 2006
PlayStation 2 – Wii
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: Xbox One/PlayStation 4/PC
Okami was a game I greatly anticipated. When I saw preview for it at E3 2006 I freaked out. The Celestial Brush really caught my eye and the art style is still to this day one of a kind. We got an open world adventure with gorgeous visuals and music, and some great combat. It remains one of the best reasons to own a PS2, and was a great way to help end that generation of games. While the HD version is the way to go today, I will never forget the 30 hours I put into this game.
Guitar Hero II – 2006
PlayStation 2 – Xbox 360
I honestly couldn’t wait for more Guitar Hero. While the game still featured cover songs, it had so many great classics with better visuals, gameplay, and an improved controller. I owned this on PS2 and then later 360 because it had some DLC which was a blast. The rhythm genre was really still getting started and hadn’t tired out yet.
Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six: Vegas – 2006
PlayStation 3 – Xbox 360 – PC – PSP
I had played the original Rainbow Six on PS1 and PC and couldn’t get into it. The new third person camera and more arcade style action was a blast and it actually had a decent story from what I remember. The game was a ton of fun, looked great, and was a blast to play online.
Half-Life 2: Episode 1 – 2006
The long anticipated Episode 1 finally came out and I downloaded this sucker right at midnight. It was short, but sweet, and improved the visuals, there were less bugs, and I loved played as Alyx in the new locales. It was more Half-Life 2 and everyone ate it up. It was one of the most talked about games for some time.
Bully – 2006
I remember this being GTA for kids. While it was still crass and had adult humor it was smaller in scale than GTA, but had great characters and setting just like GTA. I was so excited when this game released and rented it immediately. I just remember it being short and wanting more, and I later played the Scholarship Edition on PC which is the way to go.
Midnight Club 3: DUB Edition Remix – 2006
Midnight Club 3 was a fantastic arcade racer that featured real world cars. The customization was insane and even had some great licensed music. I remember having a blast with this game, but also remember it being really hard in later races. The Remix version added more content for $20 and this was the version I wound up playing.
Prey – 2006
Xbox 360 – PC – Mac
Prey was one of the first games I ever played on my 360 and man was it a blast. It’s weird, interesting, a game out of development hell, and a game we will likely never see again. It felt like a mix between Turok and Quake. The weird room flipping with portals, the interesting alien guns, and the environments were just crazy. It’s a one-of-a-kind game and I will always remember this game as one of my favorite 360 games.
Tomb Raider: Legend – 2006
PlayStation 2 – Xbox – GameCube – PSP – Xbox 360 – PC
Remastered: No | Best Played On: Xbox 360/PC
Legend was the reboot Tomb Raider needed. The series was seriously tanking, and Legend introduced revitalized gameplay and a new Lara Croft. Legend was also highly touted as one of the first true next-generation games on Xbox 360, and it looked damn good. It was one of the first next-gen games I was incredibly excited about, and the excitement paid off.
Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter – 2006
PlayStation 2 – PlayStation 3 – Xbox – Xbox 360 – PC
GRAW was one of the first of three games I played on 360 that showed me what the next-generation of games was going to be. GRAW was a different games on every system, and the only good one was 360. It was a dull FPS on PC, a crappy FPS on PS2 and Xbox, and was incredibly buggy on PS3. I played this game twice over even on the hardest difficulty and loved it. It was just the right mix of tactical gameplay and arcade gameplay.
Syphon Filter: Dark Mirror – 2006
PlayStation 2 – PSP
Remastered: No | Best Played On: PSP
Syphon Filter is one my top ten favorite games of all time. When I found out it was being rebooted on PSP I lost my mind. While it’s a far cry from the original games, it revolutionized the PSP system as a whole and showed you can make a shooter work on the handheld. It had great graphics, gameplay, and continued the story and featured characters that fans would really appreciate.
Star Wars: Empire at War – 2006
I’m not a huge RTS fan, but when a good one comes along I pick it up and Empire at War was an absolute blast. I played it on a PC that couldn’t run it very well, but I still had fun building bases and living the Star Wars dream. It felt like Starcraft meets Star Wars and was easy to pick up, but hard to master. This is by far the single best Star Wars RTS and I hope a remaster comes along at some point.
Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock – 2007
PlayStation 2 – PlayStation 3 – Xbox 360 – Wii – PC – Mac
Remastered: No | Best Played On: Xbox 360/PlayStation 3
The last great Guitar Hero game. This was the height of the rhythm genre, not the start of the decline, and Guitar Hero III had some of my favorite songs in the whole series. It had a new “sliding touch bar” feature for faster paced solo sections, and just had sharper gameplay, great visuals, and awesome DLC, I found some of my favorite bands of all time through this game as well.
Super Mario Galaxy – 2007
My all time favorite 3D Mario game for sure. Galaxy opened my eyes to a whole new Nintendo after years of bagging on them. It made me happy to be a Wii owner, and it was something you couldn’t get on any other system. I played this game twice through and collected every star there was. It was so much fun and addictive and I just couldn’t put the game down. I was very skeptical at first, but it’s a game you must play to truly understand how special it is.
BioShock – 2007
PlayStation 3 – Xbox 360 – PC – Mac
BioShock was one of the most anticipated next-generation games of the time and I remember playing the demo several times over, and staying up until midnight for it. It looked fantastic, and had a wonderful atmosphere, great gameplay, and was so much fun to play through multiple times. It’s still a classic to this day, and has thankfully been remastered since. BioShock is by far one of the best games of the last generation.
Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare – 2007
PlayStation 3 – Xbox 360 – PC – Mac – Nintendo DS – Wii
I remember being blown away by the E3 2007 demo of this game. The clip from the Pripyat level with Captain Price is legendary, and the level more so. Call of Duty 4 pushed shooters out of the WWII genre and into modern combat. The game featured revolutionary multiplayer that changed online shooters forever. It’s sad to see where the series wound up, but the remastered version is the way to go these days.
Mass Effect – 2007
One of the most exciting next-generation games that really made you want to own a system at the time. It featured fantastic visuals and facial animations, a lore as expansive as Star Wars and great gameplay and choices you could make during dialog scenes. The game was epic and it’s one of my all time favorite games. The series got better as it went on and that’s kind of rare for franchises these days.
The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass – 2007
Phantom Hourglass was the first handheld Zelda game I had played to the end, and it used every single feature of the DS cleverly, even the sleep mode. Copying a map required you to close the screen and open it. It’s such a simple and stupid thing but it made me smile so much. The gameplay was fantastic with a charming story and characters. It still remains one of my favorite Zelda games to this day.
Crysis – 2007
Crysis was revolutionary back in the day for the sheer amount of graphical power the game delivered. Not a single GPU could run the game at full specs at 60FPS and you needed two GPUs to do so. It remained a benchmarking game for nearly a decade and for good measure. It used the new DirectX 10 graphics architecture and made you jealous of any PC gamer who could run it. It was the first game I played on my first gaming laptop back in 2010 and even that thing couldn’t play the game at highest settings. It still remains a great open world game and the best in the series.
Puzzle Quest: Challenge of the Warlords – 2007
PlayStation 2 – PlayStation 3 – PSP – Xbox 360 – PC – Nintendo DS – Wii – Mac
Remastered: No | Best Played On: PSP/Xbox 360/PlayStation 3
Puzzle Quest wasn’t a game I thought I would love. It was one of the first popular match 3 gem puzzle games with RPG elements and it worked so well. I spent 40 hours completing every puzzle on my PSP during grueling work hours where there was nothing to do. It has great replay value and remains one of my favorite puzzle games of all time.
The Elder Scrolls IV: Shivering Isles – 2007
Shivering Isles somehow made Oblivion better. The introduction of Sheogorath and the Jabberwocky and his crazy dialog were just icing on the cake. The giant mushrooms, enemies, and awesome new quests made the $30 expansion worth while. It’s one of the best Elder Scrolls expansions to date as well.
Super Paper Mario – 2007
I never thought Paper Mario would return, but the third game in the series is the best and a blast. I loved transitioning from 3D to 2D and the game was just so much fun, I couldn’t put it down. This is by far one of my top five favorite Mario games of all time and for good reason.
DiRT – 2007
I really didn’t care for racing simulators after Gran Turismo 3, but the Colin McRae series has always been the top rally simulator for years. With DiRT Codemasters restructured their IPs and made one of the most successful racing series of all time. I didn’t get gold in every race by one of my sisters did which is saying something. I didn’t have a PC to run this game back in the day, but the console versions were such a blast.
Tomb Raider: Anniversary – 2007
PlayStation 2 – Xbox 360 – Wii – PSP – Mac – PC
Remastered: No | Best Played On: PC/Xbox 360
Remaking the first Tomb Raider was a smart move, but being better than the original is another thing entirely. Anniversary was so much fun to play and felt fresh with the Legend style gameplay. Puzzles were fun, combat was improved, and Lara looked better than ever. It was on so many systems, but I chose to play it on PC where it could barely run for some reason.
The Darkness – 2007
I didn’t even know this game was based on the comics until years after playing it. It remains a sleeper hit and one of my favorite Xbox 360 games to date. The use of the arms was so awesome, and the game had a dark and creepy atmosphere that also added to the replay value. The gunplay was fantastic as well and I couldn’t get enough of it.
Assassin’s Creed – 2007
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: PlayStation 4/Xbox One/PC
One of the most anticipated games of the last generation, and now of the most run-down franchises of all time. Assassin’s Creed went through some development hell before finally coming out, and not keeping up with promises. The crowd AI wasn’t exactly the best, and the game was very repetitive and limited in scope, but it still showed what the next-generation of games could do and there was nothing else like it at the time of release. While it’s not my favorite AC game it remains one of the most memorable.
Eternal Sonata – 2007
Remastered: No | Best Played On: PlayStation 3
I am not the biggest JRPG fan, but I usually love the art style, combat, and visuals and story that they can bring. Most JRPGs are generic and dime-a-dozen, but Eternal Sonata caught my eye when it used the life of composer of Chopin and infused the character’s names that related to music. I even named some of my animals after these characters. It was a short RPG, about 20 hours long, and wasn’t so grindy that you would get bored. It was beautiful, fun, and one of my favorite JRPGs to this date.
Heavenly Sword – 2007
Heavenly Sword may not be an amazing game on its own, but it was showcased at E3 2005 and I remember seeing the demo of this game live. It looked like a next-generation game and I couldn’t wait to get my hands on it. It was a well made game, and looked fantastic, but was very linear in scope and short.
Silent Hill: Origins – 2007
PSP – PlayStation 2
The last real Silent Hill game we ever got. Origins looked amazing on the PSP and was actually quite scary and felt like a Silent Hill game. I don’t think I ever finished it because I was too scared to, but staring into mirrors to get to the “Other World” with haunting music, and crazy enemy design. Yeah, it’s Silent Hill all right and one of the better ones too.
Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII – 2007
Anything Final Fantasy VII related is going to get big, and when Square Enix did their FF7 reboot stuff Crisis Core and the movie proceeding it was a huge deal. While it helped muddy the story more than needed, we got a glimpse of Zack’s life during the events of the original game. Many hated on Crisis Core for the “roulette” style gameplay, but I loved that it was hack and slash battles over turned based stuff. It remains one of the best looking games on PSP and had gorgeous CGI cut scenes.
Grand Theft Auto IV – 2008
Every GTA is a worldwide phenomenon and event. It’s not just a game release. It makes the global news channels, creates controversy, break records, etc. GTAIV was no different, and while I played it much later after release, it was a blast. It’s not my favorite GTA game, but the characters were great and it was an evolution that the series needed.
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots – 2008
MGS4 was a serious heavy hitter back in the day. It showed off the power of the PS3 during E3 and looked like something out of a sci-fi movie. The game featured 45 minute long cut-scenes, great visuals, and classic MGS gameplay. It was the first MGS I fully enjoyed, but still didn’t convince me to be a huge fan. I love the series for what it does, but stealth games are hard to hold my attention.
Fallout 3 – 2008
One of my top favorite games of all time. Fallout 3 may have upset some fans, but it was the fist game in the series for me and I loved it. Even upon release it was dated visually, and had numerous bugs, but I played the game to death and explored every corner and all the DLCs. I have the collector’s edition sitting on my shelf to this day.
Gears of War 2 – 2008
I remember going to the midnight launch for this. I was so excited for more Gears, and remains one of the best in the series. The fun new online modes, longer campaign, improved visuals, and expanded story were just mind-blowing back in the day. Gears of War was one of the games that made you want an Xbox 360.
Rock Band 2 – 2008
PlayStation 2 – PlayStation 3 – Xbox 360 – Wii
Remastered: No | Best Played On: PlayStation 3/Xbox 360
While Rock Band 1 was the next evolution in the rhythm genre, Rock Band 2 just did it better and you could import the original songs. The game had improved instruments, better visuals, more music, and an insane amount of DLC. EA was able to get more bands on board than Activision. Rock Band’s rival was Guitar Hero 4, but Activision just didn’t do the whole band thing as well.
Chrono Trigger – 2008
Remastered: Yes | Best Played On: Nintendo DS
Some say the DS version is the best port of the game before and after. It remasters the game so well and looks so good without making too many weird alterations like later ports down the road. Chrono Trigger is considered by many to be Square’s greatest RPG and one of the best games of all time. I still haven’t completed the game, but when I dabble in it here and there I appreciate the game for what it is.
God of War: Chains of Olympus – 2008
This is probably the only PSP game I really got excited for and pre-ordered right away. The demo was replayed numerous times and the game blew me away. It was a full scale God of War game, just on a smaller screen. It was very short, four hours long, but looked as good as a PS2 game. It was memorable, and shook the industry for a good while.
Fable II – 2008
Fable II was much improved over the first game. It had better mechanics, visuals, combat, and was overall more charming than the first if that’s possible. It remains the best game in the series, and one of my favorite Xbox 360 games to this date. It really does need a remaster already.
Dead Space – 2008
I didn’t really know much about this game leading up to release and only heard a lot about it just before. I bought the game on launch day and was blown away by the visuals, dismemberment combat, and fantastic story and lore. It was incredibly scary and has so much replay value. I played the game to death and replayed it a few times before finally putting it to rest.
Pure – 2008
Pure is a sleeper hit by Disney which was a huge surprise. The game is one of the best arcade racers of the last generation, and was just an absolute blast. Huge jumps, high sense of speed, and decent customization and it looked pretty good to boot. I love when sleeper hits are just really entertaining and Pure desperately needs a sequel.
Mirror’s Edge – 2008
Mirror’s Edge wasn’t received amazingly well, but I loved the first person parkour action and the art style. The pure white and red and the dystopian future is right up my ally. Faith is a great character, and while the story was seriously lacking, it had potential, but the time trials is where the challenge was really at.
Tomb Raider: Underworld – 2008
PlayStation 2 – PlayStation 3 – Xbox 360 – PC – Wii
The last of the second generation of Tomb Raider games, Underworld was a game I was really excited about, it had larger levels, better puzzles, and a decent story to boot. Lara Croft looked great in this game, and the visual improvement over Anniversary was astounding. Some people didn’t like Underworld, but it was polished and even has a lot of mods on PC.
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves – 2008
While Uncharted 1 looked great, it didn’t blow me away. Uncharted 2 did with its bombastic scripted events, and holiday style action. The story was great, Nathan Drake is an awesome character to watch on screen, and it was the best looking game to be released at the time. It remains my favorite game in the series to this day.
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 – 2009
I didn’t think Modern Warfare could be improved upon but it did. While this is sadly the peak of the series, it had a lot of controversy, and the best maps of any Call of Duty game. I spent the most time playing this online over any other Call of Duty game. It looked fantastic, had a great campaign, and just felt like a true sequel with a larger package to offer.
Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars – 2009
Nintendo DS – PSP
The only GTA game that didn’t make a big splash, Rockstar gave the portable systems some attention with a top down GTA game that was just as good as the larger games. Great story, characters, gameplay that suited each system, and was just highly entertaining. Yes, it was shorter than the larger games, but it made you proud to be a handheld gamer. We got a GTA that the others didn’t.
Batman: Arkham Asylum – 2009
Considered by some to be the best super hero games ever made, Rocksteady raised the bar for super hero games and pushed them past crappy movie tie-ins. It had amazing visuals, great voice acting, and gameplay that made you feel like Batman. While later games were more open world, the Asylum was a great place to explore with lots of puzzles and hidden content, and the fight system is one of the best action adventure fight systems ever made. Many games copy it to this day.
Assassin’s Creed II – 2009
ACII remains my favorite game in the series, and it really improved upon the first game. So many things were added and built upon that it felt like a new series all together. New protagonist, story, location, and a larger open world was just a blast to play through. More puzzles, secrets, and much improved visuals helped as well. The series will never be able to capture the lightning in a bottle that was ACII again.
Killzone 2 – 2009
Killzone 2 was one of the most hyped up games leading up to the PS3 launch. It looked too good for even a next-generation game, and when released it delivered. It still remains my favorite game in the series with visuals that hold up to this day, great gunplay, and a fun online component.
Grand Theft Auto IV: The Lost and Damned – 2009
I played this game long after release, but when I did I was engrossed by the great characters and writing. It was written better than GTAIV and kept me playing all the way through to the end. The introduction of biker gangs, territory, and new motorcycles was awesome.
Left 4 Dead 2 – 2009
One of Valve’s greatest games. Left 4 Dead 2 is still played a lot even 11 years later. While the Xbox 360 servers are down, the PC version has a ton of mods, and a large community. The variation of zombies, the sheer amount that come after you, and the unique characters make for endless amount of fun. Each experience is never the same.
Dragon Age: Origins – 2009
Origins was one of the last truly epic Western RPGs that I fell in love with. While the Xbox 360 version was the worst, I still loved the lore, characters, writing, story, and gameplay that came with it. It was a true call back to PC RPGs of the 90’s and pulled it off so well. I played the game all the way through and finished every side quest even.
Ratchet & Clank Future: A Crack in Time – 2009
The second generation of Ratchet and Clank games were a blast and helped show off the power of the PS3. Insomniac gave us more original weapons, great writing, dialog, laughs, and something to write home about. This was the last of the second trilogy and it went out with a bang.
I went to the midnight launch for this and RE5 had large shoes to fill after what was given with RE4. Another game that copied it but with Chris Redfield and a brand new character, Sheva, in the mix. While it wasn’t as memorable or as impactful as RE4, it was a solid game with a good run time and more story behind the events of RE4. It looked amazing as well with next-generation visuals.
‘Splosion Man – 2009
A crazy 2D platformer that allowed you to explode when needed. This was a sleeper hit that no one knew would actually work but it spawned a successful sequel. Sadly, Splosion Man hasn’t been seen outside of the Xbox 360 and needs a remaster or port.
Skate 2 – 2009
While Skate 3 is the definitive ending to the series, Skate 2 greatly improved upon the first game and gave us some last hope of a real skateboarding simulator, and sadly nothing else has come out in the last decade that has topped it. The flick stick system is amazing, the physics are great, and the online components were fun while they were still online at the time.
Borderlands – 2009
Borderlands was the beginning of the looter shooter era. While the game was dull alone, it had some crazy characters and fantastic shooting which is what the game is all about. Sure, the locales are boring, and it gets repetitive, but the DLC is awesome and playing with a buddy makes this a game worth playing. While the sequels are much better, nothing compares to the impact the first game made.
Half-Minute Hero – 2009
A small indie game that you would be surprised to see on this list. Half-Minute Hero is a blast by taking shots at JRPG tropes and making an entire game playable in 30 seconds. It’s hard to understand, but playing through multiple times to level up is so much fun. It’s funny, looks good, and is a rush to experience.
Torchlight – 2009
Torchlight was the answer to Diablo III by giving players with lower end PCs a looter game to play, and it was fun. The use of dungeon levels that go down and coming up to spend your cash was so much fun. I played this on a crappy netbook back in the day and the game actually had a netbook mode!
Dead Space: Extraction – 2009
A surprise hit that no one saw coming. While the Wii couldn’t handle the visuals of the main game players got an on-rails shooter that was just as stunning as the first game. It was gory, scary, brutal, and very cinematic to play and experience. I was personally shocked at how good it was and it remains one of the best shooters on the system.
Brutal Legend – 2009
Tim Schafer couldn’t get Psychonauts 2 greenlit so he partnered with Jack Black and gave us an 80’s metal anthem in game form and it was awesome. The RTS elements were the weakest, but it had a ton of humor, great characters, and fantastic music. It’s a widely overlooked game that should be played by all.
Ghostbusters: The Video Game – 2009
There aren’t many good Ghostbusters games, and most consider this the third official Ghostbuster movie. It has all the original voice actors, it lets you blast ghosts with a Proton Pack, and has nods for fans. While it was repetitive, slightly clunky, and short, it was great for fans of the movies to finally play a game that the developers put love into.
Motorstorm: Arctic Edge – 2009
The last of the Motorstorm games, this game stunned gamers when it was shown at E3 2005 using it’s terrain deformation physics. It looked like real-life TV. While the actual game didn’t live up to that, it was still a blast to play and one of the best arcade racers of the last generation. Motorstorm skipped the big consoles and showed off the power of the PSP. It was one of the last first party titles to hit the console and remains one of the best racers on the system.
Posted in: PlayStation 3, Sony Consoles. Tagged: action, adventure, heavenly sword, ninja theory, playstation, playstation 3, ps3, sony. Leave a comment
Publisher: SCEA
Developer: Ninja Theory
Available Exclusively On
When a brand new game console launches we all look toward the games they launch with to really show us what the console is capable of. There have been some failed system launches with either very few games or just poor ones. The PS3 was not such a console especially with Heavenly Sword backing it and wowing gamers across the world. Heavenly Sword puts the characters Nariko and Kai in your hands as you battle an evil warlord trying to take over your clans’ land.
Right from the start of the game you get introduced to sweeping epic landscapes, amazing graphics, beautiful sounds, and a great, albeit simple, combat system. For being a launch title the game has excellent production values and they really shine for the PS3.
The most important part of Heavenly Sword is the combat system and it never falters. You don’t receive the Heavenly Sword until a bit into the game, but once you do you are welcomed to three different fighting styles on the fly. Instead of having to stop the game and switch styles you can use them by just holding down a button. You are always in “speed” mode which breaks the sword into two swords while L1 puts you in “range” mode that is kind of like Kratos’ chain swords in God of War (which Heavenly Sword receives its nickname “Goddess of War”), and lastly holding down R1 puts you in “power” mode. There are a good amount of combos that let you switch in and out of these styles with amazing animations and a cinematic sweeping camera. Another element to the gameplay is the counter system. The enemy will glow the color of the style you need to be in to counter. Standing still is automatic block so hitting an attack button at the right time will perform a killer counter attack.
On top of this, you play as Kai who has a deadly semi-automatic crossbow that can be controlled with “aftertouch” which is controlled with the SixAxis motion controls. This was one of the first game to really utilize the SixAxis with bone-crunching and nasty kills from guided bows or anything else you can hurl at the enemy.
Puzzles in the game aren’t really a challenge since there aren’t many of them, but the bosses are. Each boss has multiple health bars, and once you get one knocked down you initiate a button pressing sequence by hitting circle (sounds just like God of War). Some bosses are just downright hard and seem impossible to beat, but remembering their attacks is the key.
Not only does the game look and sound amazing, but the story is riveting and so is the acting. With full motion capture sequences, this game has some of the most realistic facial animations I have ever seen. With Andy Serkis (Lord of the Rings, Ink Heart) as a director and actor on board, you are treated with amazing work.
If the combat isn’t satisfying enough for you there are epic battles where you fight thousands of soldiers on-screen at once. Shooting a cannon and using after touch is just so satisfying especially towards the end of the game. If you are also curious about collecting items you can unlock stuff by doing certain tasks or meeting certain goals in each section of the game. With such a beautiful game you would want to see how it was made.
If I had to see a flaw in Heavenly Sword it would be that the game is extremely short clocking in at 4-6 hours depending on your playstyle. You could literally beat this in one or two long play sessions. The game also has some technical issues with some slow down and occasional choppy animation. The combat is also a bit shallow and a tad too button mashy. Other than that I can’t wait for the sequel to be announced, but it has been over 3 years and no word, so I feel this great new IP has been abandoned.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line890
|
__label__cc
| 0.651876
| 0.348124
|
The Land We Leave Behind
Akufor I. Aneneba
THE LAND WE LEAVE BEHIND… is the story of one man’s conviction that his civilization, which was once decimated by the effects of the slave trade, is being threatened again. This time, not only from the moral authority of a radical Roman Catholic priest, but from the conflicting views of his own son’s dithering with the very basic tenets of an upbringing he grew up embracing. Torn between his newfound love in a woman he meets in America, and his father’s dream of him becoming the beholder and guardian of what remains of their civilization, the son treads carefully into the unsettling embrace of his father’s closest confidante – his own mother – to entreat himself into something that resonates with his passion, while still honoring the dictates of his culture and his father’s wishes. Johnathan’s journey will take him from the grass fields of Tchou and the urban sophistication of North America, to the Jungles of the Amazon, where he will make a stunning discovery of epic proportions. Using the science of onomatology, he discovers that Brazil’s leading scientist, who is also likely to be one of two brothers boarded onto a slave ship for the New World, is actually from a small kingdom in the tropical rainforest of the Cameroons. There is another twist in this saga, because a slave who successfully staged the first nonviolent escape from the Southern cotton fields of North America, and adopted the name David, as a free man, may indeed be of the same lineal descent with the scientist in the Amazon. This book, also extrapolates the biblical significance of the mythos of the Trinity; and how it was used by the slaves to escape into freedom’s reach. Please take the copy you are holding with you; fleece through it, to immerse yourself into the sating wrinkles of this timeless chronicle, which is a blending of fiction with actual real life events.
Publisher Name Page Publishing, Inc.
Imprint Page Publishing, Inc.
Publication Date Jul 11, 2017
Fiction & Literature » Historical fiction
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line891
|
__label__cc
| 0.676058
| 0.323942
|
Paris, 8 Months and 17 days after the crisis
Posted on December 13, 2016 by SLV Claw
Paris, much like any glamorous big city, is desirable, yet destitute. As tourists, we often fail to recognize the tragedies these cities bare within themselves, and often, we ignore the hardships all foreign nations have faced. We often believe that the vacation spot is some sort of a paradise, simply because it differs in build and culture when compared to our homeland. It is true that many Americans continue to see Paris as paradise, even one year after the historic terrorist attacks of 2015 that struck the city.
I truly love Paris and France, in general, and I adore the French and their unique character. Twice, I have been to Paris, and it is a wonderfully cultured and extremely artistic city, full of the kind of life I seize to find in my hometown. I am captured with awe by the Haussmann architecture and the men and women who will pass by me, with such elegance, in their tailored work uniforms, flaunting classic, sought-after designer brands from head to toe.
It is so very hard to look away from these ever so knowledgeable and classy people, but occasionally you catch a glimpse of a fourteen-year-old girl standing at the corner of a street, lighting a cigarette, and the facade of the perfect city falters. We forget that boy who approached our taxi asking for money, unbenounced to us that he was a Syrian refugee. We attempt to distract ourselves from the negative. After all, we are on vacation, why should we be bothered by the ill-tempered events occurring around us?
I made my second trip to Paris this past summer, exactly 8 months and 17 days after ISIS had conducted multiple attacks on the city. The attacks included a bomb going off in Saint- Denis, near a qualifying match for the UEFA Eurocup. At a Eagles Of Death Metal concert, shots were fired into the audience, killing 130 and leaving 368 wounded. A third attack took place right by a street cafe, where victims had been shot at as well. At the time, my French teacher for the past three years had been in France, visiting her mother. Frantically, we had e-mailed her, asking if she was okay. In our minds, we pleaded for an immediate answer, hoping for her safety. A few days later, the tragedy had far from left the headlines of all global newspapers. I watched a TV-report about the victims of the attack, some of which had still not been identified. Interviews with the victims’ families were scarce at that time, since the attacks had taken place just days ago. After some weeks, I heard that France had declared a State of Emergency, which was to last for a year. They increased military presence, especially in Paris, but also throughout all of France. Tensions remained high for many months in France, and in a considerable amount of the world. It was a hard thing to overcome, and to this day, over a year later, people all over the world mourn the dead and for those who underwent the absolute horror of the attacks.
In Paris, 8 months and 17 days later, I was keen enough to become aware of the scars that had been left behind on every Parisian after November 13, the most devastating day in many of these people’s lives. I noticed that soldiers had been stationed at the busiest street corners. They smiled at bypassers and gave off a sense of security, but of course, I wished there were no soldiers, for the attacks on November 13 are the sole reason for which they had even been put there in the first place. They were the grave reminder of the tragedy had occurred here, in Paris.
So, we ask ourselves: Why did ISIS target France? Experts say the location played no part. ISIS had but one goal on November 13: they wanted a big target, and they wanted to kill as many innocent people as possible, simply to inflict fear upon the Western World. The evil do it best, scaring people. They have the most reckless stratagems- this is what makes them the ‘bad guy’. France, among other European nations, had been taking in Syrian refugees, and although this may be reason for the attacks, it could only play a minimal part in the goal.
The Paris attacks, among other strikes conducted by ISIS, emphasize a challenge Europe has faced during this century- the self-destruction of the Middle East, especially Syria. This has lead to the Arab spring and the emergence of ISIS, not only in the Middle East, but also on European soil. The chaos of the Middle East has lead to the conclusion that a country that is at war with one another cannot fix itself- it instead depends on the governments of the strongest nations nearby, in this case: France, Germany, England, and many parts of Scandinavia. These countries have contributed to the crisis by letting thousands upon thousands of Syrian refugees into their country, which has lead to more complicated relationships with several nations. The Assad regime, Russia (an ally of the Syrian government), and especially ISIS play the main roles in this strained relationship and the overall chaos in the Middle East. ISIS wants supreme power and an extremely strict Islamic state on a worldwide level, and they believe that such can be accomplished by using fear tactics, like terrorism.
The French are so full of life, that they have risen above the fear and continued to flourish as a nation. 8 months and 17 days later, I sat in a cafe, and I looked around, only to notice this assertiveness the Parisians have developed. The streets were lively and crowded, 8 months and 17 days later. We went to a bar and spoke with a lovely French server about the Europa cup, and he had laughed and joked. We found that, 8 months and 17 days later, the French people, inspiring the world, proved that at cruel times, we can, indeed, carry on.
Tesina Westberg
Posted in International news, News
Coach Wally wins the Gold Whistle Award
2016: A look-back
Thrilling New Roller Coaster at the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line894
|
__label__wiki
| 0.738453
| 0.738453
|
Chinese Aggression
China plant seeds mystery solved? Police, officials think packages sent to US homes could be tied to scam reviews
The mysterious, unsolicited packages of seeds supposedly being sent from China to homes across America – prompting agriculture departments in at least 31 states to issue warnings against planting them – may be invasive species and could be tied to a fake product review scam, police and officials are saying. The packages, based on photographs and statements from officials, appeared to have been shipped by China’s state-owned postal company and contained Chinese lettering on the exterior, advertising products ranging from jewelry to toys. But, what’s actually inside seem to be random plant seeds. States from coast to coast have been urging residents to report the unexpected deliveries to their local agriculture departments over concerns that the seeds could be invasive or harmful species. The packages have garnered the attention of federal investigators — with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services (APHIS) working alongside the Department of Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection and other federal and state agencies. USDA officials have been asking anyone who received a suspicious seed package to contact their state plant regulator or their state’s APHIS plant health director. “Do not plant seeds from unknown origins,” the USDA urged in a statement. Officials in several states said there didn’t appear to be a clear pattern to the packages, which have been showing up at homes in the city, suburbs, and in rural areas. The number of packages being reported also varied. In Indiana, for instance, an official with the state attorney general’s office said it had received only a handful of reports, while in Ohio, officials have received roughly 150 calls about the packages over the past month. “We have done some researching and it does appear that these seeds are tied with an online scam called ‘brushing’,” the Whitehouse Police Department in Ohio – one of the states where the packages reportedly have been sent – posted on Facebook. “A brushing scam is an exploit by a vendor used to bolster product ratings and increase visibility online by shipping an inexpensive product to an unwitting receiver and then submitting positive reviews on the receiver’s behalf under the guise of a verified owner. “Although not directly dangerous, we would still prefer that people contact us to properly dispose of the seeds,” the department added. North Carolina’s Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services also reported the deliveries were “likely the product of an international Internet scam.” It’s not the first time this type of scam has surfaced. In 2018, a Massachusetts couple who kept receiving mystery packages from Amazon containing items ranging from USB-powered humidifiers to rechargeable dog collars feared they were being targeted. Here’s how the scam works: a seller trying to boost the ratings of their own merchandise sets up a fake email account to create an Amazon profile, then purchases the items with a gift card and ships them to the address of a random person. Once the package is delivered, the owner of the Amazon account is then listed as a “verified buyer” of the product and can write a positive review of it that gets higher placement on product pages because of their status, James Thomson, a former business consultant for Amazon told the Boston Globe at the time when asked about the couple’s deliveries. However, the deliveries of the plant seeds are more widespread and it’s not immediately clear which e-commerce website the fake reviews may be appearing on, if this is the motive behind the packages. On Monday, Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services spokesperson Michael Wallace told the New York Times that the agency has received “over 900 emails and several hundred telephone calls” from people who claimed to have received the seeds. Officials in Florida say they have gotten 160 reports about the seeds. And in Louisiana, Agriculture and Forestry Commissioner Mike Strain told the New York Times that some of the packages sent to residents there appear to contain seeds for water lily plants. “Obviously they’re not jewelry,” Lori Culley, a resident from Tooele, Utah, said to Fox13 after receiving one of the packages. “At this time, we are not sure what the seeds are and therefore are urging everyone to be exceedingly vigilant,” Georgia Agriculture Commissioner Gary Black also said in a statement. “If you have received one of these packages in the mail, please use extreme caution by not touching the contents and securing the package in a plastic bag.”
Indeed.. We’ll keep an eye on this developing story, and the possible national security implications from China, who is becoming more and more of a threat to us.
Posted in Uncategorized and tagged China, Chinese Aggression, Consumer, National Security, Scams on July 28, 2020 by majbuzzcut. Leave a comment
U.S. Closes Chinese Consulate in Houston over Privacy, IP Theft Concerns
The Chinese government on Wednesday threatened retaliatory “countermeasures” after U.S. officials abruptly ordered the closure of Beijing’s consulate in Houston. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said the Trump administration ordered the closure in an “unprecedented escalation,” and promised to “react with firm countermeasures” if the move is not rescinded. The ministry called the closure a “political provocation unilaterally launched by the U.S. side, which seriously violates international law, basic norms governing international relations and the bilateral consular agreement between China and the U.S.” It also accused the Trump administration of stigmatizing and “unwarranted attacks” against China’s social system, “harassing” Chinese diplomatic and consular staff, “intimidating and interrogating” Chinese students and “confiscating their personal electrical devices, even detaining them without cause.” State Department spokeswoman Morgan Ortagus, traveling with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in Denmark, said the closure was ordered “to protect American intellectual property and Americans’ private information.” “The United States will not tolerate [China’s] violations of our sovereignty and intimidation of our people, just as we have not tolerated the [its] unfair trade practices, theft of American jobs, and other egregious behavior,” she said. “President Trump insists on fairness and reciprocity in U.S.-China relations.” The move escalates tensions already somewhat strained by blame over the COVID-19 pandemic, trade disputes and Beijing’s military actions in the South China Sea. Possible countermeasures may include shutting down the U.S. Consulate General in Hong Kong, a Chinese academic told the Communist Party-run Global Times newspaper. “China strongly condemns such an outrageous and unjustified move which will sabotage China-U.S. relations,” the foreign ministry said in a statement posted to social media. “We urge the U.S. to immediately withdraw its erroneous decision, otherwise China will make legitimate and necessary reactions.” Tuesday night, authorities in Houston responded to a fire at the consulate, where witnesses saw papers being burned outside the facility. The closure came ahead of a Senate foreign relations committee hearing on Wednesday that will examine U.S.-China relations. The hearing will include testimony from Deputy Secretary of State Stephen Biegun. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) lauded the closure, tweeting: “#China’s Houston consulate is a massive spy center, forcing it to close is long overdue.”
Agreed, Senator. Agreed. Kudos to President Trump, Sec of State Mike Pompeo, and the rest of his team for making this happen. For more, click on the text above. Excellent!! 🙂
Posted in Uncategorized and tagged China, Chinese Aggression, Chinese Consulate, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, Houston, National Security, Politics on July 23, 2020 by majbuzzcut. Leave a comment
Houston Fire Department Responds as Chinese Consulate Burns Documents
The police and fire departments in Houston, Texas, responded on Tuesday night to reports of a blaze at the Consulate General of China. The fire turned out to be Chinese agents burning a massive trove of documents after the U.S. government ordered the consulate to be closed due to allegations of espionage. KHOU News in Houston reported that people living near the consulate made 911 calls at around 8:20 p.m. local time to report fires burning in the courtyard, but when firefighters arrived, they were denied permission to enter the premises. The Houston Fire Department explained “it would not enter the premises without consent unless there is a threat to health and safety, which officials said there was not.” The document fire was quite noticeable from outside the consulate grounds. Several fire and police vehicles arrived at the consulate building in response to the 911 calls. “You could just smell the paper burning, but all the firefighters were just surrounding the building. They couldn’t go inside,” an eyewitness told KPRC News. “It appears to be open burning in a container within the courtyard of the Chinese consulate facility. It does not appear to be an unconfined fire but we have not been allowed access. We are standing by and monitoring,” Houston fire chief Sam Pena said, as quoted by KTRK News. The Houston Police Department also said its officers responded to the 911 calls and were denied permission to enter the building. The fires were reportedly extinguished soon after the fire department arrived at the scene.
To see videos, and more, click on the text above.
Posted in Uncategorized and tagged China, Chinese Aggression, Houston, Houston Fire Department, National Security on July 23, 2020 by majbuzzcut. Leave a comment
Up to 8,000 Chinese nationals came into US after Trump banned travel due to coronavirus: AP
Thousands of Chinese citizens have reportedly come into the U.S. since President Trump restricted travel on foreign nationals in January, arriving from China after the coronavirus outbreak. According to a recent report by The Associated Press, citing data it obtained regarding travel from the U.S. Commerce Department, as many as 8,000 Chinese nationals and foreign residents of Hong Kong and Macao have entered the U.S. over the last three months. More than 600 flights brought in travelers from these areas after Trump announced his travel ban in late January and it was enacted Feb. 2. Trump’s initial travel ban included any non-U.S. travelers coming from China, and excluded anyone coming from Hong Kong or Macau in late January. Travelers from Hong Kong and Macao also did not face the same scrutiny or screening processes as Americans or any foreign nationals coming into the U.S. after having been in Wuhan — where the coronavirus outbreak started. Flight records from FlightAware provided to The Associated Press showed that 5,600 Chinese and foreign nationals from Hong Kong and Macau arrived in the U.S. in February. More than 2,000 passengers from the same administrative zones arrived in March and an additional 150 in April, according to The AP report. There is no sufficient evidence to show people from these flights transmitted the coronavirus, but the National Security Council, the State Department, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) would not publicly comment on why these territories were exempt from the China travel ban. One administration official told The AP that the travel ban was instated after more than 12,000 people arrived in the U.S. through the two territories in January, according to Commerce records. The Trump administration said it would also require any Americans who have traveled through China and back into the U.S. to undergo a 14-day quarantine period. But according to data collected by The Associated Press, the system that was meant to track and monitor the people undergoing quarantine lost track of at least 1,600 Americans. Trump has touted his border closures, first from China, then European nations and Brazil, as the U.S.’s first line of defense against the coronavirus. In a tweet last week. the president said: “We did a great job on Coronavirus, including the very early ban on China.” “We saved millions of U.S. lives! Yet the Fake News refuses to acknowledge this in a positive way,” he added. Trump’s travel ban on China went into full effect on Feb. 2, at which time 15 people had already been confirmed with coronavirus in Hong Kong and seven people in Macau. The cases from Macau were later linked directly to Wuhan, the origin of the outbreak. The U.S. has reported more than 2.7 million cases of the coronavirus and nearly 130,000 deaths during the pandemic. Hong Kong has since banned all travelers from the U.S.
Posted in Uncategorized and tagged Chinese Aggression, Coronavirus, Covid-19, National Security, Public Health, Travel, Travel Ban on July 5, 2020 by majbuzzcut. Leave a comment
Chinese military officer arrested while allegedly trying to steal US medical research
A Chinese military officer was caught trying to leave California with university research materials this week, after allegedly lying on an application to obtain a visitor visa for a work-study exchange program, the Justice Department announced. Xin Wang, a scientific researcher and officer with China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA), was arrested at LAX as he was attempting to board his flight to Tianjin, China, according to court documents unsealed this week. He faces visa fraud charges. Wang entered the U.S. on March 26, 2019, to conduct scientific research at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), according to his J1 non-immigrant visa application. The application, however, is said to have contained fraudulent statements — including claims that his service with the PLA had ended in 2016 — that were made to increase the chances that he would receive visa approval. Officials claim Wang revealed that he had instructions from the director of his military lab to observe the layout of the UCSF lab with the understanding that they wanted to try to replicate it in China. He was also accused of attempting to bring materials to China with him and had already emailed research. When interviewed by Customs and Border Protection this week, Wang purportedly admitted that he was currently a “Level-9” technician — which was equated to the rank of major — for the PLA, employed by a military university lab. He also allegedly said he had received compensation from the PLA and the China Scholarship Council. WeChat messages are said to have been wiped off of Wang’s phone the day he was expected to board his plane. If convicted, he faces a maximum statutory penalty of 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000.
IF this is all true, that’s the least that should happen to him. A clear message needs to be sent to the Communist Chinese Party (CCP), that we’re not putting up with their aggression towards us. We need to counter them on every possible level.
Posted in Uncategorized and tagged Chinese Aggression, Crime, Espionage, National Security on June 13, 2020 by majbuzzcut. Leave a comment
Pompeo takes aim at ‘obscene’ Chinese propaganda meant to exploit civil strife in U.S
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Saturday denounced Chinese Communist Party propaganda aimed at fueling U.S. civil unrest and seeking to further divide Americans. “The Chinese Communist Party’s callous exploitation of the tragic death of George Floyd to justify its authoritarian denial of basic human dignity exposes its true colors yet again,” Mr. Pompeo said in a statement. “As with dictatorships throughout history, no lie is too obscene, so long as it serves the party’s lust for power. This laughable propaganda should not fool anyone.” Chinese diplomats and state-run media outlets in recent weeks have disseminated a steady stream of reports criticizing the U.S. government and Trump administration. Officials said the Chinese propaganda attacks are aimed at fueling racial and political tensions. The official Xinhua news agency and Global Times, the state-run hardline Communist Party newspaper, sent out numerous stories criticizing the Trump administration for its policies toward minorities. The propaganda is coming from the Chinese government that itself is under fire for imprisoning more than 1 million Uighurs in western China, along with other human rights abuses. Mr. Pompeo said in recent days Beijing “showcased its continuing contempt for the truth and scorn for law.” “The CCP’s propaganda efforts – seeking to conflate the United States’ actions in the wake of the death of George Floyd with the CCP’s continued denial of basic human rights and freedom – should be seen for the fraud that they are,” he said. “During the best of times, the PRC ruthlessly imposes communism,” he said. “Amid the most difficult challenges, the United States secures freedom.” Mr. Pompeo noted the stark contrast between the United States and communist-ruled China. “In China, when a church burns, the attack was almost certainly directed by the CCP,” he said, using the acronym for Chinese Communist Party. “In America, when a church burns, the arsonists are punished by the government, and it is the government that brings fire trucks, water, aid, and comfort to the faithful.” Under Chinese President Xi Jinping, the officially-atheist government has cracked down on unofficial house churches that are frequently bulldozed to prevent gatherings of worshipers. Mr. Pompeo also said that peaceful protesters in China’s Tiananmen Square or in Hong Kong get clubbed by armed militiamen for simply speaking out, and reporters who cover the dissent are sentenced to long prison terms. In the United States, American law enforcement authorities bring rogue officer to justice. Peaceful protests are welcomed while looting and violence are shut down. “Our free press covers events wall to wall, for all the world to see,” he said. Also, doctors and journalists in China who warned of the dangers of the new coronavirus outbreak were silenced and imprisoned. The Beijing government also lied about death totals and the extent of the disease outbreak, Mr. Pompeo said. “In the United States, we value life and build transparent systems to treat, cure, and underwrite – more than any other nation – pandemic solutions for the globe,” he added. Chinese authorities imprison people who diverge from CCP ideology or place them in re-education camps, the secretary said. The secretary of state’s comment provide the first U.S. government acknowledgement that China is among the foreign actors seeking to further inflame racial tensions in the United States. Attorney General Bill Barr said earlier this week that he had evidence that among the protesters around the country there are “”foreign actors playing all sides to exacerbate the violence.” FBI Director Christopher Wray also said foreign elements had “set out to sow discord and upheaval.” A U.S. official said videos posted online recently showed what appeared to be Chinese embassy and consulates personnel taking a direct role in riots in Washington and California.
Our thanks to veteran D.C. columnist, and best-selling author, Bill Gertz for that excellent piece! 🙂
Posted in Uncategorized and tagged Bill Gertz, CCP, China, Chinese Aggression, Chinese Communist Party, Chinese Propaganda, Communism, Mike Pompeo, National Security on June 6, 2020 by majbuzzcut. Leave a comment
Opinion/Analysis: Trump is right to ditch 5 decades of failed US-China engagement policy
In less than nine minutes, President Trump delivered remarks at the White House on Friday signaling his administration has ditched almost five decades of the American policy of engagement with China. It’s about time. China has been challenging the United States across the board, and Trump – with his comprehensive comments Friday – signaled the United States would defend itself across the board. Trump announced a series of actions, including: Terminating America’s relationship with the World Health Organization. Trump said the WHO is biased in favor of China and has failed to approve reforms arising out of its dealing with the coronavirus pandemic that originated in China. The move cuts off about $450 million in U.S. funding for the WHO. Trump said the U.S. would use those funds for “other worldwide and deserving urgent global public health needs.” Suspending entry into the U.S. of Chinese nationals posing a security risk. Revoking almost all special exemptions and rules for Hong Kong and imposing sanctions on Chinese and Hong Kong officials. Studying the “differing practices” of Chinese companies listed in the U.S. The president signed a proclamation stating that he will block entry into the United States of Chinese students and researchers tied to U.S. military efforts. In his brief remarks, Trump also commented on other matters, especially the spreading of the coronavirus. “The world is now suffering as a result of the malfeasance of the Chinese government,” he said. On the issue of Hong Kong, Chinese leaders were undoubtedly waiting to see if Trump would withdraw America’s special treatment of the beleaguered territory on trade and other issues. Some thought Trump would not do this, making this issue a test of his resolve. In meeting the test, the president showed political will rarely seen in American leaders. Most observers thought the president would concentrate his remarks on Hong Kong. The surprising aspect of the comments was their comprehensive nature. Moreover, the tone of the president’s words – he was not only adversarial but also angry – broke with decades of precedent. Chinese leaders have not heard an American leader talk to them this way in public. The range of announced actions should concern Chinese leaders. The actions suggest Trump is now leading a whole-of-government charge on China. Not everyone thought Trump was so resolute. The Financial Times, for instance, said Trump “pulled his punches,” not adopting a “range of measures” the markets feared. For instance, he did not terminate the Phase One trade deal, signed Jan. 15. Yet the trade agreement looks shaky – termination or no termination. There are signs China will not meet its principal commitment – increasing purchases of American goods and services by $200 billion over a two-year period. A result, the trade deal is in danger. The Financial Times also said the markets were relieved that Trump did not impose new tariffs or freeze assets of Chinese nationals. The markets should not break out the champagne just yet, however. The Trump administration will be announcing more actions in the weeks to come, probably including “full expensing” for costs to relocate factories from China and Hong Kong to the United States. Larry Kudlow, the director of the president’s National Economic Council, talked about such subsidies in an interview with Fox Business’ Stuart Varney on Tuesday. Moreover, Trump’s mentioning of the behavior of listed Chinese companies is a warning that investment is the next big area on the chopping block. China for months has been saying the “decoupling” of the United States from China was not possible. However, on Friday Trump was making the process look inevitable. Trump said he wanted “an open and constructive relationship with China” – but ultimately the state of relations is not up to him. Beijing, showing off its “wolf warrior diplomacy” has taken a series of aggressive actions since February including: invading India; engaging in boat-bumping and other incidents against six of its neighbors in the South China and East China Seas; threatening to invade Taiwan; breaking promises over Hong Kong; and increasing the tempo of dangerous intercepts of the U.S. Navy in China’s peripheral waters and airspace. It’s not entirely clear why China is lashing out at this moment. Some say it’s a sign of strength. Others says it is a sign of weakness. But it is evident that America’s engagement policy has failed. Engagers, adopting a long view, often ignored or condoned unacceptable Chinese behavior. That feckless policy approach – conducted by U.S. presidents of both parties and by liberals and conservatives alike – only emboldened the worst elements in Beijing by showing everybody else that aggression worked. The upshot is that there is now a perception that Chinese communism cannot be reformed – meaning the only thing the Trump administration can do to protect America is to reduce exposure to China. The underlying theme of the president’s actions Friday was that his administration is cutting ties with Chinese communism. That is the correct approach. The People’s Republic of China is more than just an adversary. A year ago the Communist Party declared a “people’s war” on America. That hostility means that apart from surrendering to Beijing, there is not much Trump can do to patch up relations with China. This is not a Trump issue; it is a China one. There will be costs in unwinding decades of misguided U.S. policies toward China – how could there not be? But Beijing is leaving Trump with little choice. It’s time an American leader did what is necessary: go after China on all fronts. And that’s what the world heard Friday from President Trump.
Exactly right!! Thanks to Gordon C. Chang, the author of that spot-on analysis. Gordon is the author of “The Coming Collapse of China.” Follow him on Twitter @GordonGChang. Excellent!! 🙂
Posted in Uncategorized and tagged China, Chinese Aggression, Donald Trump, Foreign Policy, Gordon Chang, President Trump, Trump on June 1, 2020 by majbuzzcut. Leave a comment
Tom Cotton, Marsha Blackburn Plan Ends China-to-U.S. Student Visa Pipeline
Senators Tom Cotton (R-AR) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) are looking to end China’s pipeline of foreign students to fill spots at American universities and take American STEM jobs. In the wake of the Chinese coronavirus crisis, Cotton and Blackburn — as well as Rep. David Kustoff (R-TN) in the House — have filed legislation called the SECURE CAMPUS Act that ends the China-to-United States pipeline of Chinese nationals receiving student visas for STEM fields. “The Chinese Communist Party has long used American universities to conduct espionage on the United States,” Cotton said in a statement. “What’s worse is that their efforts exploit gaps in current law. It’s time for that to end.” In short, Cotton and Blackburn’s plan would: Ban Chinese nationals from receiving student visas to the U.S. for STEM fields Ban Chinese nationals from working on federal R&D grants in STEM fields Require universities, labs, and research institutes recieving federal taxpayer money to confirm that they will not knowingly employ participants in China’s foreign talent recruitment programs Require China’s foreign talent recruitment program participants to register as foreign agents Require the State Department to publish a list of China’s foreign talent recruitment programs Blackburn said in a statement: ” Beijing exploits student and research visas to steal science, technology, engineering, and manufacturing secrets from U.S. academic and research institutions. We’ve fed China’s innovation drought with American ingenuity and taxpayer dollars for too long; it’s time to secure the U.S. research enterprise against [China’s] economic espionage.” As Breitbart News has chronicled, the U.S. legal immigration system remains hugely beneficial to China. From 2008 to 2018, more than 825,000 Chinese nationals arrived in the U.S. on green cards — an immigration status that provides them with permanent residency, a pathway to American citizenship, and eventually the ability to bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the country through the process known as “chain migration.” There are nearly 500,000 Chinese students in the U.S. in any given year — more than any other country — taking seats in university classrooms and looking to eventually obtain Optional Practical Training (OPT) visas to take entry-level jobs in white-collar professions. In Fiscal Year 2019, alone, Chinese nationals secured about 170,000 F, J, and M visas to arrive in the U.S. as students — more than any other country in the world.
And it needs to end. It’s ridiculous! Major kudos to Sens. Cotton and Blackburn for spearheading this effort. Let’s hope it turns into a bill, and then into law. Excellent!! 🙂
Posted in Uncategorized and tagged China, Chinese Aggression, Immigration, Marsha Blackburn, National Security, Sen. Tom Cotton, Tom Cotton on May 29, 2020 by majbuzzcut. Leave a comment
Trump pulls U.S. out of World Health Organization, slaps penalties on China over Hong Kong action
President Trump announced Friday the U.S. is terminating its relationship with the World Health Organization over its handling of the coronarvirus crisis, and took limited actions to punish China for misleading the world on the virus and for its security crackdown on Hong Kong. Mr. Trump also announced he was ending U.S. preferential treatment for Hong Kong, as Beijing moves to curb its autonomy. “Chinese officials ignored their reporting obligations to the World Health Organization and pressured the World Health Organization to mislead the world,” Mr. Trump said in a Rose Garden announcement at the White House. “The Chinese government has continually violated its promises to us and so many other nations. These plain facts cannot be overlooked or swept aside,” Mr. Trump said. Mr. Trump said the U.S. will redirect certain funding, amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars per year, that would normally go to the WHO. For weeks, the administration threatened to enlist other organizations to conduct health projects it would normally fund under the leadership of WHO. Mr. Trump also suggested China allowed the virus to spread around the world, but not within China. “The world needs answers from China on the virus,” Mr. Trump said. “We must have transparency.” Deaths in the U.S. from the virus topped 100,000 this week, and business shutdowns to slow the spread have thrown roughly 40 million Americans out of work in less than three months. The president will impose sanctions on Hong Kong and Chinse officials who are involved in restricting freedoms in Hong Kong. He also said the U.S. is suspending the entry of “certain foreign nationals from China” as potential security risks. He further announced a move to study “differing practices” of certain Chinese companies trading in U.S. financial markets “with the goal of protecting U.S. investors.” But the actions did not appear as broad or as harsh as U.S. investors had feared. Major stock indexes rose in trading after Mr. Trump’s announcement. Rep. Chris Smith, a leading congressional critic of China’s human rights record, said past administrations answered China with “cheap rhetoric,” emboldening Chinese President Xi Jinping to be ever more aggressive. “President Trump, however, is beginning to change that and is doing what previous presidents have failed to do,” the New Jersey Republican said. “For the sake of oppressed people, the United States — even if we have to go it alone — must impost sanctions.” The president said Beijing’s crackdown on Hong Kong “is a tragedy for the people of Hong Kong, the people of China and indeed, the people of the world.”
Indeed.. And we need to do much more to punish China. But, this is a good first step by the Trump Administration. And, hey.. It’s far more than Hillary or Joe Biden would ever do.
Posted in Uncategorized and tagged China, Chinese Aggression, Donald Trump, Foreign Policy, Politics, President Trump, Trump, WHO, World Health Organization on May 29, 2020 by majbuzzcut. Leave a comment
Sen. Josh Hawley Explains How to Take on China and Save America
On May 20, speaking from the Senate floor, Josh Hawley, the youngest member of the chamber, laid out his plan for fixing international trade, taking on the People’s Republic of China, and thereby, too, saving America. In so doing, Hawley, populist firebrand that he is, showed that he was willing to overturn the stale orthodoxies that have mildewed our economy and undermined our security. In his speech, Hawley laid out the core problem: The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has taken advantage of the flaws built into the current international economic system, embodied in the World Trade Organization (WTO), that agglomeration of unelected globalcrats. As Hawley put it, “We must recognize that the economic system designed by Western policy makers at the end of the Cold War does not serve our purposes in this new era.” He added, “And we should admit that multiple of its founding premises were in error.” Those founding premises, Hawley continued, trace back to the save-the-world utopianism of our 28th president, Woodrow Wilson. Having entered World War One in 1917, Wilson had some strange ideas; for one thing, it would be “a war to end all war,” and, he added, we must strive for “peace without victory.” Yes, such concepts might seem a bit, well, unrealistic; you know, like the musings of an ivory-tower professor. In fact, Wilson had been a professor and subsequently, in fact, he held presidency of Princeton University before winning the White House. So maybe now we can see the origins of his vaulting but vacuous phrasemaking. Indeed, without a doubt, Wilson was a great talker; he wove webs of words and theories that have bewitched many politicians since, inspiring them to be wannabe Wilsonians. For instance, there was George W. Bush, who said he heard “a calling from beyond the stars,” summoning America to wars of choice, aimed at “ending tyranny in our world.” Well, we know how that worked out. As Hawley said, “During the past two decades, as we fought war after war in the Middle East, the Chinese government systematically built its military on the backs of our middle class.” Exactly. While we were liberating Fallujah for the third or fourth time, the Chinese were hollowing out our economy. Of course, Bush wasn’t our only warlike president in the past two decades; we also had Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, both of whom launched foreign interventions as well, even as they were welcoming Chinese products and influence into the U.S. Indeed, as an aside, one wonders what Obama’s vice president, Joe Biden, thinks of all this: Has he learned the lesson of Iraq and other quagmires? Has he rethought trade with China? Those are certainly good questions to be answered during the remainder of the 2020 campaign season. Okay, back to Hawley. Having raised serious questions about the status quo, he offered three specific answers: First, we should withdraw from the World Trade Organization. As Hawley put it, the WTO was built on a false promise: the idea that the nations of the world would converge around a fair and non-manipulated trading system; as the Missourian put it, “they wanted a single liberal market to support a single, liberal international order that would bring peace in our time.” Yet in the decades of the WTO’s existence, the countries of the world haven’t come together on much of anything—except, perhaps, to snooker Uncle Sucker. And we might pause to note Hawley’s slyly ironic use of the words, “peace in our time.” That’s an allusion to the catastrophically mistaken statement of British prime minister Neville Chamberlain; back in 1938, Chamberlain made a wrongheaded deal with Adolf Hitler, which he said would bring “peace in our time.” Wrong! Yes, Hawley is saying, the stakes today are potentially that high; we can’t stay in an organization that has “not been kind to America.” He added, “The WTO’s dispute resolution process has systemically disfavored the United States”—and favored China. Second, Hawley says that having left the WTO, the U.S. should negotiate new trade deals on a more reciprocal and bilateral basis; that is, the U.S. should make a trade deal with, say, the United Kingdom—and then on to another deal with the next potential trading partner. As Hawley explained, “We must replace an empire of lawyers with a confederation of truly mutual trade.” Indeed, Hawley argues that a new focus on win-win trade deals—as freely determined by the two countries actually involved in the deal, as opposed supranational WTO-crats—deals that would offer a new opportunity for the U.S. to put together better alliances, based on mutually beneficial economic and strategic relationships: We benefit if countries that share our opposition to Chinese imperialism—countries like India and Japan, Vietnam, Australia and Taiwan—are economically independent of China, and standing shoulder to shoulder with us. So we should actively pursue new networks of mutual trade with key Asian and European partners, like the economic prosperity network recently mentioned by Secretary Pompeo. We might pause over one of the countries Hawley mentioned above, Taiwan. Its formal name is the Republic of China (ROC), an island nation whose capital is Taipei. In other words, the ROC is separate and very much distinct from the People’s Republic of China, whose capital, of course, is Beijing. The two nations split in 1949, when Mao Zedong’s Soviet-backed communists took over the mainland. In the decades since, the ROC, population 23 million, has become a prosperous and free country, while the PRC is merely … prosperous. (And, of course, menacing.) So it’s notable that Hawley has become a strong champion of Taiwan, which stands not only as a bulwark against the PRC, but also as proof that the Chinese people, if given a choice, will choose freedom. Third, Hawley wants to crack down on the ability of international capital, including Wall Street, to hopscotch the world—and step all over the people of the world. As Hawley explains about the current WTO dominion,
To continue reading, or see the video of Sen. Hawley’s (R-MO) speech, click on the text above. Excellent!! 🙂
Posted in Uncategorized and tagged China, Chinese Aggression, Josh Hawley, Politics, Sen. Josh Hawley on May 27, 2020 by majbuzzcut. Leave a comment
Gutfeld on Biden blaming Trump for violence
Pentagon: Chinese Air Force fast-becoming massive threat
SeaWorld is permanently laying off some of its employees
After historic Israel-UAE flight, other Muslim-majority countries considering to follow suit
Tiffany Trump: ‘Thoughts, Opinions,’ Votes Are ‘Manipulated’ by Media, Big Tech
majbuzzcut on Dana Perino: ‘Disgusting…
Shannon on Dana Perino: ‘Disgusting…
majbuzzcut on Why farmers dump food and crop…
Kristen Grace on Why farmers dump food and crop…
majbuzzcut on Majority of Americans give Tru…
Kentucky Dirby
liberal media
Revoluntionary War
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line897
|
__label__wiki
| 0.963005
| 0.963005
|
Jennifer Saunders confirms she's writing 'AbFab' movie
Jennifer Saunders has confirmed she is in the process of writing Absolutely Fabulous: The Movie. Saunders and co-star Joanna Lumley last returned to the iriconic roles of Edina Monsoon and Patsy Stone for a trio of special episodes shown in 2011 and 2012, and ever since Saunders have been asked about when she will be bringing the much-loved sitcom to the big screen. “I am writing the film as we speak – it’s in the pipeline," Saunders said at the Hay Festival over the weekend, the South Wales Evening Post reports. Saunders - who created the sitcom with Dawn French, and wrote every episode - then added: "I am hoping it will be released by the end of next year." In February of this year, recurring AbFab cast member Christopher Malcolm, who played Edina's gay ex-husband Justin, passed away at the age of 67. It has yet to be confirmed whether Lulu will be returning to her popular AbFab role as a version of herself for whom champagne is inevitably ordered.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line898
|
__label__wiki
| 0.54383
| 0.54383
|
My Travels With a Dead Man - Book Review
My Travels With a Dead Man
Author: Steve Searls
Genre: Fiction - Supernatural
Publisher: Black Rose Writing
Date Published: August 27, 2020
Book Review of : My Travels With a Dead Man
Steve Searls supernatural thriller, My Travels With a Dead Man, begins with a gripping scene of a young woman, Jane Takako Wolfsheim, having a severe seizure in a park. A man who appears as a vagrant gives her assistance and uses her phone to call “911.” Jane is rushed to a hospital, and after a considerable struggle, she is well enough to be released. She wonders who was the poor man who saved her, but the top of her list is to find a job. In a terribly humiliating interview with a former partner of her father’s, she lands a job. A chore given to her by her disgusting boss creates a strange coincidence that puts her in contact with the man who had saved her life. His name is “Jorge Luis Borges.” The name is synonymous with a famed writer, but he assures her that he is not that - “Jorge Luis Borges.”
Love blooms between the two of them, along with a fantastical series of events. They travel to Japan, and more strange happenings occur, and Jane wakes up in Costa Rica without any recognition of how she got there or why she was there. She is also told that the trip to Japan never occurred.
Jane has trouble processing all that is happening and to make things worse, she is suddenly arrested for the murder of her parents. Did she kill them and repressed her memories of the deed? This is a book that will keep you hooked. I started reading it and found myself reading late into the evening as Searls led me through doors into mind-bending scenarios. The events that occur are shrouded in mystery, and you have to continually question what is real and what isn’t?
Or are all these events happening but in different realms of consciousness. Did Jane kill her parents? Did she travel to Japan? Who really is “Jorge Luis Borges?” Who is Basho? Searls’ novel is a kaleidoscope of altered states that makes you seriously question if parallel universes and counterfactuals exist. Searls offers up trips and dreams, stories-within-stories, and virtual realities in a richly-imagined world, with a cast full of diverse characters.
I loved My Travels With a Dead Man is a series of dark, strange, eerily odd encounters. It grabbed me and kept my interest right to the last period. It was suspenseful, disturbing, and sometimes even poignant. If you are a lover of supernatural thrillers, this is a book for you.
Reviewed by: James B.
About Steve Searls
Steve Searls retired from the practice of law in 2002 due to a rare chronic autoimmune disorder (Tumor Necrosis Factor Receptor Cell Associated Periodic Syndrome). He began writing poetry in 2001 and, using the pseudonym, Tara Birch, was the featured poet of Tryst Poetry Journal's Premiere Issue. He's also published numerous poems as Tara Birch in print and online, including the poetry chapbook, Carrots and Bleu Cheese Dip, in 2004. Steve's published essays on Medium include "Clara's Miracle," about his wife's cancer and resulting traumatic brain injury from chemotherapy, and "My Rape Story." Raised in Colorado, he now lives with his adult son in Western NY. My Travels With a Dead Man is his first novel.
Visit Steve Searls's page
Visit http://www.stevesearls.com/ for more information on Steve Searls
No comments submitted.
Be the first to comment on this book.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line900
|
__label__wiki
| 0.9537
| 0.9537
|
Digest: Horvath perfect in UMBC men's basketball rout; UMES women outlast UMBC
By Baltimore Sun staff
Brandon Horvath had a perfect day shooting on his way to a career-high 22 points, Joe Sherburne moved into the top 10 in scoring at UMBC and the Retrievers swamped Division III Centenary (N.J.), 98-48, on Monday. Horvath went 6-for-6 from the field with three 3-pointers, and 7-for-7 from the free-throw line as the Retrievers (8-7) shot 63 percent from the field. Sherburne scored 18 points, making him the 11th Retriever to surpass 1,300 points. Horvath and Sherburne both had seven rebounds. The game was never in doubt as UMBC raced to a 43-12 lead. To that point the Cyclones, who played the game as an exhibition, had four 3-pointers. Their next six points were free throws and another 3 followed before they made their first 2-pointer 18 seconds before halftime. Divine Anderson had 13 points for Centenary, which shot 28 percent and had 21 turnovers while being outrebounded by 18.
More men’s college basketball: Tyler Jones had 19 points and seven rebounds to help UMES beat Division-II Chestnut Hill, 68-62. Colen Gaynor added 12 points on 5-of-6 shooting and Isaac Taylor scored 11 for the Hawks (2-13), who ended an eight-game skid. Ed McWade made two free throws to trim the deficit to 55-49 with seven minutes to play, but UMES scored 10 of the next 11 points, capped by Jones’ 3 that made it 65-50 with 3 minutes to go and held on from there, despite another rally that pulled the Griffins within six with 25 seconds remaining.
Dominant rebounding leads Rutgers women's basketball to upset of No. 4 Maryland, 73-65
Rutgers gave a dominant rebounding performance in a 73-65 victory over No. 4 Maryland to hand the Terps their first loss of the season.
By Ian Quillen
Women’s college basketball: Ciani Byrom scored 23 points to help visiting UMES earn a 73-67 win over UMBC in overtime. Blairesha Gills-Miles added 16 points and Keyera Eaton had 15 for the Hawks (4-9), who took a 62-59 lead with 1:17 to play in regulation before the Retrievers’ Tyler Moore hit a 3-pointer with 10 seconds left to send the game into overtime. In the extra period, Moore hit another 3, her fifth of the game, to put the Retrievers up 65-64 with 2:44 left, but the Hawks responded with a shot-clock beating 3 to take the lead for good. Te’yJah Oliver scored 17 points, Janee’a Summers had 16 and Moore finished with 15 for UMBC (7-6), which has lost six of its past seven games. ... Sophie Gatzounas scored 13 points to help host Navy (5-5) secure a 49-48 win over Saint Joseph’s (Pa.) (4-9). Gatzounas’ 3-pointer with 1:10 to play gave the Mids a 47-46 lead, and Mary Kate Ulasewicz made two free throws with 13 seconds remaining to seal the victory for Navy.
D.C. United acquires attacker Rodriguez on loan
D.C. United has finalized the acquisition of attacker Lucas Rodriguez from Argentine club Estudiantes, a one-year loan with an option to purchase next winter. To acquire his Major League Soccer discovery rights, United sent $50,000 in general allocation money to Atlanta, which had first taken interest in the 21-year-old midfielder. Rodriguez promises to bolster an already formidable attack, led by Luciano Acosta and Wayne Rooney, and add to an Argentine-seasoned midfield. Acosta, the playmaker, is coming off his finest season in Washington and United is attempting to retain countryman Yamil Asad, who was on loan from Argentina’s Velez Sarsfield in 2018. (The club is optimistic of striking a deal.) In theory, Ben Olsen could start the three Argentines in a line behind Rooney, the English striker who revived the organization last summer. The undisclosed loan fee, one source said, would go toward the price of purchasing Rodriguez’s contract, a transfer that could cost more than $3 million. His international value is listed at about $3.7 million. Despite his age, Rodriguez has played regularly in the Argentine first division, starting 53 league matches the past 2½ seasons and 12 Copa Libertadores games over two years. He also started for Argentina at the 2017 Under-20 World Cup in South Korea.
— Steven Goff, The Washington Post
NHL: The Washington Capitals re-assigned defenseman Tyler Lewington to the Hershey Bears of the American Hockey League.
Latest College Basketball
After coronavirus issues, Navy women’s basketball finally set to begin Patriot League play
After ‘emotional month,’ Mount St. Mary’s men’s basketball returns to comforts of home in 77-57 victory over Merrimack
CIAA, Bowie State to honor Baltimore during weeklong virtual basketball tournament next month
Men’s volleyball: Stevenson senior outside hitter Landon Shorts was named to the 2019 Off the Block Division III Preseason All-American Team on Thursday. Shorts was one vote shy of being a unanimous selection to the 15-member team. Shorts, who was the inaugural Middle Atlantic Conference Player of the Year last season, totaled 313 kills while hitting .293 for the Mustangs in 2017, while also recording 219 digs and 43 blocks. He helped lead the Mustangs to the MAC championship and an NCAA quarterfinal appearance.
Maryland Eastern Shore Hawks
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line902
|
__label__cc
| 0.649964
| 0.350036
| ERROR: type should be string, got "https://www.barrons.com/articles/strand-bookstore-owner-buys-amazon-stock-51591228940\nThe Owner of Strand, an Iconic New York City Bookstore, Just Made a Big Purchase of Amazon Stock\nEd Lin\nJune 3, 2020 8:02 pm ET\nThe Strand Book Store in New York City.\nNancy Bass Wyden, owner of the Strand Book Store in New York City and wife of Sen. Ron Wyden, recently disclosed that she bought at least $115,000 worth of Amazon. com stock.\nThe stock purchases, which took place in April and May, were disclosed in forms filed with the Office of the Secretary of the Senate on June 1 and earlier in May.\nBass Wyden has been critical of Amazon (ticker: AMZN) in the past. A year ago, when New York City designated the Strand a landmark, Bass Wyden told NPR in an interview that “Amazon’s been a huge disrupter, and it’s not easy.”\nFrom April 6 through May 1 of this year, she bought Amazon stock in three transactions worth between $115,003 and $250,000. Specific values aren’t required for disclosure, only ranges. She hadn’t owned any Amazon stock in 2019 or 2018, according to prior disclosures.\nIn a statement to Barron’s, Nancy Bass Wyden said: “As a small-business owner trying to maintain operations during difficult times, it was necessary for me to diversify my personal portfolio and invest in stocks that are performing. I have to make sure that I have the resources to keep The Strand going. I continue to stand against the unfair giveaways from local governments to giant corporations like Amazon, but the economic opportunity presented by the unfortunate downturn in the market will allow me to keep The Strand in business.\n“I would also like to clarify that these are my personal finances, not Ron’s, and we do not discuss my business or my investments,” she added.\nA private investor isn’t usually obligated to report stock trades to regulators, but Bass Wyden is married to Sen. Wyden, an Oregon Democrat. Public officials must disclose financial transactions valued over $1,000 made by them, their spouses, and dependent children, usually within 30 days.\nSen. Wyden’s office referred questions to Bass Wyden.\nThe Strand was opened in 1927 by Bass Wyden’s grandfather, Ben Bass. The store moved to its present location on 12th Street and Broadway in 1957.\nAmazon began in 1994 as an online bookseller. Its stock has surged 34% in 2020. Morgan Stanley recently noted that the retail and cloud giant would likely see lasting gains from the pandemic-driven shift to online sales. Amazon has said it would retain the employees it hired to meet the new demand.\nBass Wyden’s recent transactions also included purchases of Facebook (FB), PayPal Holdings (PYPL), and chip maker Nvidia (NVDA). Those all appear to be new positions. She didn’t hold the stocks last year or the year prior.\nInside Scoop is a regular Barron’s feature covering stock transactions by corporate executives and board members—so-called insiders—as well as large shareholders, politicians, and other prominent figures. Due to their insider status, these investors are required to disclose stock trades with the Securities and Exchange Commission or other regulatory groups.\nWrite to Ed Lin at edward.lin@barrons.com and follow @BarronsEdLin.\nNancy Bass Wyden, owner of the Strand Book Store in New York City and wife of Sen."
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line903
|
__label__cc
| 0.566202
| 0.433798
|
AccountingIntermediate Accounting: Reporting And AnalysisThe following are independent errors made by a company that uses the periodic inventory system: a. Goods in transit, purchased on credit and shipped FOB destination, $10,000, were included in purchases but not in the physical count of ending inventory. b. Purchase of a machine for $2,000 was expensed. The machine has a 4-year life, no residual value, and straight-line depreciation is used. c. Wages payable of $2,000 were not accrued. d. Payment of next year’s rent, $4,000, was recorded as rent expense. e. Allowance for doubtful accounts of $5,000 was not recorded. The company normally uses the aging method. f. Equipment with a book value of $70,000 and a fair value of $100,000 was sold at the beginning of the year. A 2-year, non-interest-bearing note for $129,960 was received and recorded at its face value, and a gain of $59,960 was recognized. No interest revenue was recorded and 14% is a fair rate of interest. Required: 1. Next Level Indicate the effect of each of the preceding errors on the company’s assets, liabilities, shareholders’ equity, and net income in the year in which the error occurs. State whether the error causes an overstatement (+), an understatement (−), or no effect (NE). 2. Prepare the correcting journal entry or entries required at the beginning of the year for each of the preceding errors, assuming the company discovers the error in the year after it was made. Ignore income taxes.
The following are independent errors made by a company that uses the periodic inventory system: a. Goods in transit, purchased on credit and shipped FOB destination, $10,000, were included in purchases but not in the physical count of ending inventory. b. Purchase of a machine for $2,000 was expensed. The machine has a 4-year life, no residual value, and straight-line depreciation is used. c. Wages payable of $2,000 were not accrued. d. Payment of next year’s rent, $4,000, was recorded as rent expense. e. Allowance for doubtful accounts of $5,000 was not recorded. The company normally uses the aging method. f. Equipment with a book value of $70,000 and a fair value of $100,000 was sold at the beginning of the year. A 2-year, non-interest-bearing note for $129,960 was received and recorded at its face value, and a gain of $59,960 was recognized. No interest revenue was recorded and 14% is a fair rate of interest. Required: 1. Next Level Indicate the effect of each of the preceding errors on the company’s assets, liabilities, shareholders’ equity, and net income in the year in which the error occurs. State whether the error causes an overstatement (+), an understatement (−), or no effect (NE). 2. Prepare the correcting journal entry or entries required at the beginning of the year for each of the preceding errors, assuming the company discovers the error in the year after it was made. Ignore income taxes.
Intermediate Accounting: Reporting...
James M. Wahlen + 2 others
1 The Demand For And Supply Of Financial Accounting Information2 Financial Reporting: Its Conceptual Framework3 Review Of A Company's Accounting System4 The Balance Sheet And The Statement Of Shareholders' Equity5 The Income Statement And The Statement Of Cash FlowsM Time Value Of Money Module6 Cash And Receivables7 Inventories: Cost Measurement And Flow Assumptions8 Inventories: Special Valuation Issues9 Current Liabilities And Contingent Obligations10 Property, Plant And Equipment: Acquisition And Subsequent Investments11 Depreciation, Depletion, Impairment, And Disposal12 Intangibles13 Investments And Long-term Receivables14 Financing Liabilities: Bonds And Long-term Notes Payable15 Contributed Capital16 Retained Earnings And Earnings Per Share17 Advanced Issues In Revenue Recognition18 Accounting For Income Taxes19 Accounting For Post Retirement Benefits20 Accounting For Leases21 The Statement Of Cash Flows22 Accounting For Changes And Errors.
Problem 1GI
Problem 10GI
Problem 1MC
Problem 10MC
Problem 1RE
Problem 10RE
Problem 1P
Problem 10P
Problem 1C
Problem 10C
Chapter 22, Problem 13E
The following are independent errors made by a company that uses the periodic inventory system:
a. Goods in transit, purchased on credit and shipped FOB destination, $10,000, were included in purchases but not in the physical count of ending inventory.
b. Purchase of a machine for $2,000 was expensed. The machine has a 4-year life, no residual value, and straight-line depreciation is used.
c. Wages payable of $2,000 were not accrued.
d. Payment of next year’s rent, $4,000, was recorded as rent expense.
e. Allowance for doubtful accounts of $5,000 was not recorded. The company normally uses the aging method.
f. Equipment with a book value of $70,000 and a fair value of $100,000 was sold at the beginning of the year. A 2-year, non-interest-bearing note for $129,960 was received and recorded at its face value, and a gain of $59,960 was recognized. No interest revenue was recorded and 14% is a fair rate of interest.
1. Next Level Indicate the effect of each of the preceding errors on the company’s assets, liabilities, shareholders’ equity, and net income in the year in which the error occurs. State whether the error causes an overstatement (+), an understatement (−), or no effect (NE).
2. Prepare the correcting journal entry or entries required at the beginning of the year for each of the preceding errors, assuming the company discovers the error in the year after it was made. Ignore income taxes.
Chapter 22,
Ch. 22 - Describe the three types of accounting changes.Ch. 22 - Describe the two possible methods that a company...Ch. 22 - Describe two situations in which a company could...Ch. 22 - What steps are necessary to apply the...Ch. 22 - Does the adoption of a new accounting principle...Ch. 22 - What are direct and indirect effects of a change...Ch. 22 - In which situations may it be impracticable for a...Ch. 22 - How does a company report a change in an...Ch. 22 - Define a change in estimate. What is the proper...Ch. 22 - What distinguishes a change in an accounting...
Ch. 22 - How is a change in depreciation method accounted...Ch. 22 - Describe a change in a reporting entity. How does...Ch. 22 - How does a company report an error of a prior...Ch. 22 - Describe two errors that affect only a companys...Ch. 22 - Describe two errors that affect only a companys...Ch. 22 - What is a counterbalancing error? Describe two...Ch. 22 - What is a noncounter balancing error? Describe two...Ch. 22 - Why does a company correct errors even after they...Ch. 22 - How does the accounting for an indirect effect of...Ch. 22 - If a company that uses IFRS discovers an error but...Ch. 22 - The cumulative effect of an accounting change...Ch. 22 - When a change in accounting principle is made...Ch. 22 - On January 1, 2019, Belmont Company changed its...Ch. 22 - A change in the expected service life of an asset...Ch. 22 - During 2019, White Company determined that...Ch. 22 - Generally, how should a change in accounting...Ch. 22 - On January 2, 2017, Garr Company acquired...Ch. 22 - A company has included in its consolidated...Ch. 22 - Shannon Corporation began operations on January 1,...Ch. 22 - Shannon Corporation began operations on January 1,...Ch. 22 - The two methods of reporting an accounting change...Ch. 22 - Heller Company began operations in 2019 and used...Ch. 22 - Refer to RE22-2. Assume the pretax cumulative...Ch. 22 - Refer to RE22-2. Assume Heller Company had sales...Ch. 22 - Bloom Company had beginning unadjusted retained...Ch. 22 - Suppose that Blake Companys total pretax...Ch. 22 - Bliss Company owns an asset with an estimated life...Ch. 22 - At the end of 2019, Framber Company received 8,000...Ch. 22 - At the end of 2019, Cortex Company failed to...Ch. 22 - At the end of 2019, Jayrad Company paid 6,000 for...Ch. 22 - At the end of 2019, Manny Company recorded its...Ch. 22 - Abrat Company failed to accrue an allowance for...Ch. 22 - The following are independent events: a. Changed...Ch. 22 - The following are independent events: a. Changed...Ch. 22 - The following are independent events: a. A...Ch. 22 - Change in Inventory Cost Flow Assumption At the...Ch. 22 - Fava Company began operations in 2018 and used the...Ch. 22 - Berg Company began operations on January 1, 2019,...Ch. 22 - Delta Oil Company uses the successful-efforts...Ch. 22 - In 2020, Frost Company, which began operations in...Ch. 22 - Gundrum Company purchased equipment on January 1,...Ch. 22 - Newton Company introduced a line of laptop...Ch. 22 - On January 1, 2014, Klinefelter Company purchased...Ch. 22 - The following are independent errors made by a...Ch. 22 - The following are independent errors made by a...Ch. 22 - Refer to the information in E22-13. Required:...Ch. 22 - The following are independent errors: a. In...Ch. 22 - Dudley Company failed to recognize the following...Ch. 22 - On January 2, 2019, Quo Inc. hired Reed as its...Ch. 22 - At the beginning of 2020, Flynne Company decided...Ch. 22 - Koopman Company began operations on January 1,...Ch. 22 - Schmidt Company began operations on January 1,...Ch. 22 - Since Goode Oil Company was formed in 2018, it has...Ch. 22 - Kraft Manufacturing Company manufactures two...Ch. 22 - Jackson Company has decided to issue common stock...Ch. 22 - At the beginning of 2020, Holden Companys...Ch. 22 - At the end of 2020, while auditing Sandlin...Ch. 22 - At the beginning of 2020, Tanham Company...Ch. 22 - A review of Anderson Corporations books indicates...Ch. 22 - Cask Companys bookkeeper, who has maintained its...Ch. 22 - Gray Companys financial statements showed income...Ch. 22 - Ingalls Corporation is in the process of...Ch. 22 - There are three types of accounting changes:...Ch. 22 - The various types of accounting changes may...Ch. 22 - Berkeley Company, a manufacturer of many different...Ch. 22 - When the FASB issues a new generally accepted...Ch. 22 - It is important in accounting theory to be able to...Ch. 22 - In 2001, Enron Corporation filed financial...Ch. 22 - You are auditing the financial records of a...Ch. 22 - Disclosures Obtain Kelloggs 2017 annual report...Ch. 22 - Obtain LVMH (Moet Hennessy 2 Louis Vuitton)s 2017...Ch. 22 - Sometimes a business entity may change its method...
From the following list of selected items taken from the records of Rosewood Appliance Service as of a specific...
Explain how the formalization of tasks promotes internal control.
Cash flows from operating activitiesindirect method Selected data (in thousands) derived from tile income state...
Horizontal analysis The comparative accounts payable and long-term debt balances for a company follow. Current...
Make or Buy, Qualitative Considerations Hetrick Dentistry Services operates in a large metropolitan area. Curre...
Sell or process further Dakota Coffee Company produces Columbian coffee in batches of 7,500 pounds. The standar...
Communication WBM Motorworks is a manufacturer of high-end touring and off-road motorcycles. On November 30, th...
Compute the following activity measures for Esplanade Enterprises for 20-2: (a) Accounts receivable turnover an...
Technology Summary 5.2 (pp. 159160) uses examples of employee ID codes to illustrate five data coding types. Re...
(Shifts of Aggregate Demand) Assume the simple spending multiplier equals 3. Determine the size and direction o...
From the Google Finance site, look at Hewlett Packards profitability ratios (as measured by its profit margin, ...
(Price Floor) There is considerable interest in whether the minimum wage rate contributes to teenage unemployme...
Explain why two indifference curves cannot cross.
Explain the difference between nominal and real variables and give two examples of each. According to the princ...
Is absolute advantage or comparative advantage more important for trade? Explain your reasoning using the examp...
(Economic Systems) The United States is best described as having a mixed economy. What are some elements of com...
Based on the information in this section, would you choose accounting as a career?
Table 1.7 shows data for eight cordless telephones (Consumer Reports, November 2012). The Overall Score, a meas...
Economics is best defined as the study of a. how society manages its scarce resources. b. how to run a business...
Explain the concept of ethical behavior
To learn from the presentation skills of the best speakers today, visit the TED channel on YouTube or the TED w...
Executive salaries have been shown to be more closely correlated to the size of the firm than to its profitabil...
A small nation of ten people idolizes the TV show The Voice. All they produce and consume are karaoke machines ...
Differentiate the six categories of marketing.
What are the costs of inflation? Which of these costs do you think are most important for the U.S. economy?
The following questions are about your feelings toward communication with other people. Indicate the degree to ...
Classifying cash flows Identify whether each of the following would be reported as an operating, investing, or ...
From the list that follows, identify the accounts that should be closed to Income Summary at the end of the fis...
Use the information in Problem A-1 to solve this problem. Required Prepare a schedule of depreciation using the...
Describe the transactions recorded in the following T accounts:
What is the difference between a current liability and a long-term liability?
Consider the data set in Table 1.7 a. Compute the average endowment for the sample. b. Compute the average perc...
The present value of a perpetuity is equal to the payment on the annuity, PMT, divided by the interest rate, I:...
BALANCE SHEET ANALYSIS Complete the balance sheet and sales information using the following financial data: Tot...
If MPC was equal to 0.5, would doubling your income double your consumption spending?
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS A work sheet for Juanitas Consulting is shown on the following page. There were no additio...
Describe supply and demand in the market for loanable funds and the market for foreign-currency exchange. How a...
With what internal and external entities does the purchasing process interact?
Financial statements Padget Home Services began its operations on January 1, 20Y7 (see Problem 2-3). After its ...
Youngston Company (a Massachusetts employer) wants to give a holiday bonus check of 750 to each employee. Since...
Horizontal analysis of income statement For 20Y2, Macklin Inc. reported a significant increase in net income. A...
Add necessary hyphens and delete those that are unnecessary. Write correct if you find no errors. The Web based...
Would voters have a greater incentive to vote in an election involving only a few registered voters or in one t...
Which types of firms are most suited to using turnkey systems contracts for their information system developmen...
Sometimes a single-stage decision can be broken down into a sequence of decisions, with no uncertainty resolved...
Explain how to derive a PPE. For instance, how is the extreme point on the vertical axis identified? How is the...
Suppose an MC curve falls when output is in the range from 1 unit to 10 units. Then it flattens out and remains...
Define and discuss the three measures of organizational performance used by the theory of constraints.
A rightward shift of the investment demand curve would be caused by a(an) a. increase in the expected rate of r...
Kennedy Appliance Inc.s Machining Department incurred 450,000 of factory overhead cost in producing hoses and v...
Problem 1-64A Stockholders' Equity Relationships Data from the financial statements of four different companies...
Which of the following is not an argument used in favor of protectionism? a. to protect an infant industry b. t...
Name five of the fastest-growing economies in the world since 1990. Why do you think these economies have grown...
What factors determine the cost of producing a good or service? Will producers continue to supply a good or ser...
Consider a broom factory that permanently closes because of foreign competition. If the broom factorys workers ...
One for All and All for One? Melinda Asbel watched as three of her classmates filed out of the conference room....
If a senator trades his or her vote on an issue for a 10,000 payment, would you consider this corruption? If a ...
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line906
|
__label__wiki
| 0.958125
| 0.958125
|
BDCT / News and events / Latest News / Uncategorised / Bradford Cathedral to host its first NHS carol service
Bradford Cathedral to host its first NHS carol service
Posted: Wednesday, 16 December 2015
Bradford Cathedral will celebrate the work of local healthcare staff when it holds its first carol service for the NHS this Christmas.
Current and former NHS staff across Bradford, Airedale, Wharfedale and Craven, along with their friends and family, are invited to join in the service at the cathedral on Thursday 17 December.
Staff are familiar with the long-standing NHS carol service at York Minster, but for the first time there will also be a service here in Bradford.
The service of readings and carols is also open to members of the public to attend. Tickets are not required, and doors open at 6.15pm with the carol service starting at 7pm.
The Very Reverend Jerry Lepine, Dean of Bradford, said: “We want the carol service to be a celebration of the local NHS, and this promises to be a lovely festive occasion – right on our doorstep at our wonderful cathedral.
“There’s really nothing like a carol service for getting everyone in the festive mood, and it will be a way of saying ‘thank-you’ to all our local NHS staff who work so hard to look after us. We welcome everyone to come along and join us in celebration.”
Helen Hirst, chief officer of NHS Bradford City and Bradford Districts CCGs, said: “I’m delighted that the cathedral is holding the carol service for NHS staff and the wider community; it’s a lovely gesture and I know many staff are planning to attend.”
Staff are expected to attend from the local NHS clinical commissioning groups (CCGs), Airedale NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust; Bradford District Care NHS Foundation Trust and GP practices.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line909
|
__label__wiki
| 0.93978
| 0.93978
|
What they're saying: Julian Assange indicted under Espionage Act
Rashaan Ayesh
Photo: Jack Taylor/Getty Images
New charges brought against Julian Assange on Thursday indicted the Wikileaks founder for revealing government secrets, marking the first time a publisher has been charged under the Espionage Act.
Why it matters: Prior administrations have resisted invoking the World War II-era Espionage Act against journalists, largely out of respect for the First Amendment.
Thursday's charges unleashed a firestorm of statements and opinions from legal minds, First Amendment advocates and politicians.
"The issue isn't whether Assange is a 'journalist'; this will be a major test case because the text of the Espionage Act doesn't distinguish between what Assange allegedly did and what mainstream outlets sometimes do, even if the underlying facts/motives are radically different," per a tweet from University of Texas law professor Steve Vladeck.
WikiLeaks tweeted: "This is madness. It is the end of national security journalism and the first amendment."
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden tweeted: "The Department of Justice just declared war — not on Wikileaks, but on journalism itself. This is no longer about Julian Assange: This case will decide the future of media."
Former Alaska senator and 2020 presidential hopeful Mike Gravel tweeted: "No matter your thoughts on Julian Assange, the latest indictments—under the outdated Espionage Act—are a disgrace. If you support the indictments out of hate for him, you're giving Trump a weapon to restrict the press. The charges should be dropped and the Espionage Act repealed."
The ACLU released a statement saying: "For the first time in the history of our country, the government has brought criminal charges against a publisher for the publication of truthful information. This is an extraordinary escalation of the Trump administration's attacks on journalism, and a direct assault on the First Amendment."
Committee to Protect Journalists' Executive Director Joel Simon wrote: "The indictment of Julian Assange under the Espionage Act for publishing classified information is an attack on the First Amendment and a threat to all journalists everywhere who publish information that governments would like to keep secret."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) released a statement: "This is not about Julian Assange. This is about the use of the Espionage Act to charge a recipient and publisher of classified information. I am extremely concerned about the precedent this may set and potential dangers to the work of journalists and the First Amendment.”
The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press released a statement saying: "Any government use of the Espionage Act to criminalize the receipt and publication of classified information poses a dire threat to journalists seeking to publish such information in the public interest, irrespective of the Justice Department’s assertion that Assange is not a journalist."
The other side:
Head of the Justice Department’s National Security Division John Demers said, "Some say that Assange is a journalist and that he should be immune from prosecution for these actions. The department takes seriously the role of journalists in our democracy. But Julian Assange is no journalist. This is made plain by the totality of his conduct as alleged in the indictment.”
Go deeper: Timeline: Julian Assange's 9-year legal limbo reaches its climax
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line911
|
__label__cc
| 0.518766
| 0.481234
|
Singapore hosted its second International Conference on Ayurveda on June 21, 2017 as part of their interest in making Ayurveda a part of their traditional medicine. Jawed Ashraf, India’s High Commissioner to Singapore talked about his hope of Ayurveda getting recognized in Singapore. He calls it unfortunate that Singapore still doesn’t have a system in which Ayurveda gets the same recognition as other medical systems.
“People look at the rising costs of medical treatments, the side effects of chemicals, of dealing with the lifestyle diseases which are growing both in developed, undeveloped countries, people are turning to traditional medicines, whether it is Chinese or Indian and Ayurveda is suddenly becoming very popular,” said Jawed Ashraf. According to Ashraf, parts of Latin America, Asia and Africa have already accepted Ayurveda as any other healthcare systems.
By mentioning the memorandums of understanding with Russia, China, Hungary and Poland, MOU’s for research with universities in USA, Germany and France, he expressed his hope to get the same recognition in Singapore as well.
He said that once this recognition is got, it would enable the Vaidyas of Ayurveda to practice this medical system in a systematic manner. It would also help in the import Ayurveda medicines in Singapore and enable insurance cover for this treatment.
“Ayurveda like Yoga may have its roots in India, but we want Ayurveda to be seen as an inheritance of the entire world and something that would become a part of Singapore’s system,” Ashraf concluded.
Tags: recognition Ayurveda
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line912
|
__label__cc
| 0.547744
| 0.452256
|
Exciting futures are built by visionaries, which brings me back to reflecting on our early days. The festival would never have soared without the support of key partners, including:
Michael Crow, president of Arizona State University, who understood our vision and provided significant funding to launch the festival.
Sandra Watson, president and CEO of the Arizona Commerce Authority, who believed the festival would provide important support for economic development efforts.
Steve Zylstra, president and CEO of the Arizona Technology Council, who provided mentorship and hundreds of introductions.
Chevy Humphrey, then-president and CEO of the Arizona Science Center, who helped connect the festival to the STEM community, ensuring high scientific integrity.
Eileen Klein, then-president of the Arizona Board of Regents, who saw the important link between celebrating science and showcasing research conducted at the state’s universities.
My wife, Jennie Bever, who supported me and our family while putting in countless hours driving all over Arizona.
Arizona’s leading tech companies, such as major supporters Cox Communications, Freeport-McMoRan, Intel, State Farm and SRP. This year, we welcome Zoom, a befitting nod to the virtual world in which we now live.
Please join us when the festival launches Jan. 30 or at any of the themed events throughout February. You can find the full schedule at www.scitechinstitute.org.
Jeremy Babendure is executive director of the SciTech Institute. Reach him at jbabendure@scitechinstitute.org.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line913
|
__label__wiki
| 0.681263
| 0.681263
|
1 What's Missing from the Box
What's Missing from the Box[edit]
I'm not the kind of person who clearly remembers things that have already come and gone. Even if someone were to tell me that something or other had definitely happened, say in elementary or middle school, all too often I could only stare blankly back at them, offering an unsure "Did it now?" in response. And yet, though there were also experiences I shared with others, I was occasionally the only one able to retain lucid memories of them later on. I had no way of knowing what it was that separated that which I would eventually forget and that which I would always remember.
Tracing through my memories—through the seemingly limitless gray of uncertain places and events—there were occasional moments of vivid recollection. These mostly chronicled events like sports festivals, daytime excursions, and school field trips through the woods, while others covered pointless events I didn't deem important, but, through the gradual weathering of time, still found themselves somehow cemented in a special spot in my memory. I couldn't help but feel a strange sense of admiration at their tenacity. On the other hand, I realized there were also times when I found myself clearly remembering a single tiny fragment of a completely normal day, one wholly indistinguishable from any other at the time. Unlike the detailed, magazine article-like memories that recorded events, they were extremely fragmented, void of anything orienting them. Even then, they were difficult to forget, memories akin to an old photograph you couldn't bear to throw away. For example, tirelessly watching the whirlpools born from clashing channel waters in summer, the robust imagination sprung on by rows of imposing volumes from unreachable library bookshelves in winter, competing for the last book at a store on the way home with your friend, only for the both of you to give it up in autumn... What exactly was it that separated these memories from the countless forgotten?
Then there were moments when I was suddenly struck by a certain feeling: “I might never forget this.” Won't I always remember that June night as well, under which I walked the city streets enveloped by a lukewarm breeze? Though, I guess I won't be able to confirm that feeling of mine until ten, twenty years in the future.
It all began with a single phone call.
I made yakisoba for dinner that evening.
It had been fairly clear out in the afternoon, but because the clouds gathered as the day set and seemingly prevented the heat from escaping back into the sky, the night air around me was humid and none the cooler, despite the absent sun. As everyone else in my family had their own pressing matters to attend to, I was alone in the house. Cooking sounded like it'd be a pain, so I peeked through the fridge in the hopes of finding leftovers or something else that didn't require effort to prepare and spotted some chilled noodles meant for yakisoba.
I found some shriveled lettuce, dried enoki mushrooms, and stale bacon, so I cut them up to shreds. I added oil to the pre-heated frying pan and threw in the noodles first, letting them sit there for the meantime. White steam started to billow upwards from the pan, and I became somewhat anxious as I hadn't added any water, but I managed to suppress that feeling in the end and waited a couple of minutes as it was being cooked, pulling the noodles apart every now and then. I then transferred them—crunchy, almost burnt—to a plate all at once and then started sautéing the other ingredients. When those were cooked as well, I moved them to the edge of the pan with long cooking chopsticks and poured Worcestershire sauce in the now empty space. As it started to simmer, its iconic fragrance wafted up from the pan and dyed the kitchen air around me with yakisoba tones. I finally added the sauce to the noodles and lightly tossed the mixture. With that was one order, ready to serve.
I carried the plate from the kitchen to the living room and then brought out a pair of chopsticks with a glass of barley tea to finish my preparations. On the table was some sort of postcard for my sister, reading "Class 3-I Reunion Notice." I don’t want to imagine what she'd say to me if I ended up accidentally getting sauce on it, so I moved the postcard to the letter rack, and finally, I was ready to dig in without any further distractions. I brought my hands together, and just as I picked up the chopsticks, the phone started to ring.
I looked up at the clock on the wall and it read exactly half past seven. The nerve of someone to call at a time meant so perfectly for dinner... To add to that, I was the only one home, so whoever they wanted to speak to was likely not even here in the first place. At first, I was just going to let it continue ringing as I picked up the steaming yakisoba noodles, but it ended up being so incessant and sincere that ignoring it any further caused a strange feeling of guilt to well up from within me. If I had to do it, do it quickly; I sighed and put my chopsticks back down. I stood up and picked up the receiver.
"Hello, is Oreki-kun—"
I had assumed the call was going to be for my father or sister, but the voice from the other end wound up being one I was all too familiar with. Perhaps guessing from my voice and the atmosphere between us, the person calling suddenly switched from his polite tone to his usual one.
"Houtarou?"
"Whew, what a relief. I didn't think you'd be the one to answer. I'd have no idea what to say if that sister of yours picked up the phone instead."
Although it might've been fortuitous for Satoshi Fukube, I couldn't say the same for me.
"Sorry, but for every second I talk with you, my yakisoba gets colder and colder."
"What?! Yakisoba you say?! What a tragedy!"
Yes, a tragedy, indeed.
"I'm glad you understand. Please get to the point, then."
I heard laughter in his voice. "You wouldn't have this problem if you just got a cellphone already. That's not what I wanted to talk about, though... I was hoping you'd take a little walk with me. You free after this?"
As I wasn't really the type of person to party late into the night, I rarely left the house after dinner. It’s not like it wasn't unheard of, though. Thinking back on it... that's right. I had gone on an evening stroll with Satoshi once before. I glanced at the clock again. It'd probably take me fifteen minutes or so to finish the yakisoba, and some time after that to change.
"Yeah, I can leave at about eight."
"Okay. I'm glad to hear that. Should I come pick you up?"
I drew a map in my head of the distance between both of our houses. I'm sure he'd be willing to come all the way here considering he was the one who asked me in the first place, but I guess there was no reason to bully him like that. I thought up a location that was more or less an equal distance between our houses.
"Let's meet up at Akabashi Bridge."
"Sounds good. It'd be terrible to let your yakisoba get any cooler, so let's continue our conversation then. See ya."
The call promptly ended there without any lingering hesitation or closing remarks. He probably figured that any longer would only annoy me; that sensitivity was just like him.
When I returned to the table, the surface of the yakisoba had in fact cooled. With a simple one, two tosses of what previously seemed cold, however, heat began to rise from the dish once more.
Moonlight pierced down through the thin clouds in the sky, and a damp wind blew between the many houses around me. I had left the house wearing a wool shirt at first but immediately felt too hot despite the nighttime breeze, so I changed into a cotton one instead.
Although I couldn't fit my wallet into my chinos' pockets, the idea of carrying a bag with me sounded like a hassle. At the same time, however, I couldn't really rely on Satoshi to cover me if we did end up needing to spend money and I didn't have any on me, so I took two thousand yen notes from my wallet and put them into my shirt's pocket. I stuck my thumbs into my pants pockets and left the house at the promised hour, but night fell early in Kamiyama City, and the narrow streets had already descended into soft silence.
Although I didn't really rush at all, I managed to arrive at our rendezvous point in less than ten minutes. As the name Akabashi literally meant "red bridge," it was exceedingly common, and in reality, the bridge we were meeting at wasn't even called that in the first place. It was called that, as you might imagine, because it was painted red, and its original name was forgotten all too easily. The area itself was often crowded in the afternoon because of the banks and the post office nearby, but I had no idea it became so empty after the sun set. I looked at the red bridge, illuminated by the street lights, but I saw no one there. How strange, I thought, I thought he would've left first. As I looked around, however, a hand suddenly touched my shoulder from behind.
"Evening..."
Although I'd be lying if I said I wasn't surprised, I wasn't that taken aback either. It's possible I sensed his surprise attack when I didn't see him at first. Without even turning around, I responded with a simple "Hey."
"What a let-down. Where's the love?"
Satoshi circled in front of me with a grin on his face, but it felt like there was something hidden behind his smile. His eyes didn't meet mine, but instead fixated on the bridge as he continued.
"Where should we go now?"
"I'll leave it up to you."
I didn't have much experience with these kinds of things, so I didn't know what was normal for a nighttime stroll. Satoshi turned his head and said, "It'll get a little more lively if we walk towards the city, but... I guess we can't go through the streets with all the bars. They're pretty scary."
"Probably, yeah, Mr. General Committee Vice President."
"There’s a family restaurant up ahead if we follow the bypass.. It's open 24 hours."
That was far, though. We wouldn't be able to get there without a car, or at least a bicycle. I guess Satoshi wasn't being serious, however, as he continued, "Well, let's just see where the wind takes us."
I didn't mind in the slightest.
Satoshi crossed Akabashi Bridge and started to follow a small path going upstream, along the city river. There was more water in it than usual, probably a result of the rainy season, and I could hear the gushing sounds of its strong currents. There were no streetlights in this part of the city, so I could only rely on the glow seeping from the faintly illuminated windows of the surrounding houses and the occasionally hidden moon to see my path. That said, my eyes eventually became fairly used to the darkness. Past a gnarled knothole in an aging wooden fence, past a curiously constructed sake bar with a traditional ball of interwoven cedar leaves functioning as a customer chime from the eaves, past the front of a rundown public bath with a "closed" sign lying on its side, we walked slowly through the city night.
Embankments had been constructed on both sides of the river, and they looked something like large stone walls. A good number of trees were planted in a row along the edge, and among them were some that curved out above the water's surface, almost as if they were flinging themselves out of the procession in the hopes of finding sunlight. I suddenly stopped and placed a hand on one of those roadside trees. Its surface was abundant with stiff bumps and protrusions, and its leaves resembled a shiso's in size. It was a cherry blossom tree. I bet this was a popular spot for cherry blossom viewing, and these well-kept streets almost certainly become lively in the flower blooming seasons. At this moment, however, only Satoshi and I walked along them, and these trees which have already discarded their blossoms wouldn't even be recognized for their true nature without a closer look. It seemed a bit sad, but what can you do? Time moves on.
I lifted my hand from the tree trunk and asked, "So, what's wrong?"
Satoshi hadn't called me out for a walk to simply enjoy the night, of course.
Sure, our friendship had gone on for some time, but it wasn't all that deep. We rarely ever made plans over the weekend, and when we went home together, it was usually only because we finished up at school at the same time. The fact that Satoshi had called me out like this almost certainly meant that he had something he needed to talk about, and not only that, it also meant that it was either too urgent to put off until tomorrow or too confidential to talk about around prying ears at school.
The Satoshi I knew often beat around the bush, but tonight, that wasn't the case.
"I'm in a difficult situation," he said as he started to walk once more.
"I don't want anything to do with trouble."
"Trouble, huh? At the very least, I can say with certainty that I'm in a troublesome spot, but the most troubling part of it for me is that you have absolutely nothing to do with my situation."
Unable to comprehend exactly what he was trying to say, I frowned slightly in response. He shrugged and continued.
"In other words, the trouble for me is that I need to ask you for your help, Houtarou, even though you have absolutely zero stake in it."
"I see. If I were to go along with your request—"
"—it would go against your motto, 'If you don't have to do it, you won't.'"
What Satoshi was saying was correct in principle, but I had already rushed to finish my yakisoba to join him in the city. Had I intended on turning him away without even listening to his story that had nothing to do with me, I would've probably been washing the sauce-covered frying pan right now at home instead.
"Well, you can tell me what's going on at least."
Satoshi nodded. "You're too good to me. You remember that the student council president election was held today, right?"
"Yeah..."
Although it had happened mere hours ago, I had already managed to forget. After school ended, we casted our votes for the next student council president as the term for the previous one, Muneyoshi Kugayama, came to a close.
At Kamiyama High School, this election period was set to last for a week. During that period, the candidates put up posters all throughout the school grounds, made the case for themselves during school-wide assemblies, and debated one another over the intercoms via the broadcasting club. All of that came to a close yesterday, and today was when we voted.
"Do you remember the candidates?"
I racked my mind for the answer to Satoshi's question. "There were two... no, three people I think."
He returned an almost sad smile.
"I was going for names, but to think you didn't even remember how many people there were. The correct answer is two, though I guess you'd have to pay attention to know that. Our school is bursting at the seams with strange clubs, but the student council doesn't really stand out in comparison."
"That's true. The candidates were both sophomores, too."
"You remember that, huh? It's only natural they were sophomores. The freshmen just got here in April, and the seniors are going to be busy taking tests now."
I guess hearing the reason did make it pretty obvious.
"It was a face-off between Haruto Obata from Class D and Seiichirou Tsunemitsu from Class E. You might think everything ended after the voting, but I was actually one of the people tallying the votes."
I wasn't that interested in how the Kamiyama High School student council president election worked from behind the scenes, but his statement certainly piqued my curiosity. The jack-of-all-trades Satoshi Fukube is involved in a variety of clubs and groups, just for the hell of it. Specifically, he was a member of the Classics and Handicrafts Clubs and had been involved with the general committee ever since he was a freshman, now, even unceremoniously serving as its vice president. No matter how out of touch I was with the organizations in our school, even I remembered that there was an election administration committee as well.
"What happened with the election?" I asked.
Right as I did, Satoshi smiled. "Of course, it's the election administration committee that's responsible for the ballot boxes and vote counting. I was in charge of the oversight. Among the school rules governing school elections, there's a regulation stating that there has to be at least two students overseeing the vote counting process. The rules say that the only qualification needed to be met for this job is not being one of the candidates or in the election committee. So apparently, you used to be able to apply for it. Now, though, it's become a custom to delegate that job to the general committee president and vice president. I guess it would be a pain to have to search for people to do it every time."
Although he explained it so smoothly for me, it was precisely that lack of hesitation that made it so suspicious. This was Satoshi we were talking about, after all... As if picking up on my doubts, he quickly continued.
"I'm serious! I'm not lying. Not one bit!" he insisted repeatedly.
"Fine, fine. So?"
"There was a problem with the counting."
"At present, Kamiyama High School has 1,049 students, that is to say, 1,049 eligible voters."
When I first enrolled, there were 350 freshmen split among eight classes, so Satoshi's number seemed pretty reasonable in you counted all three grades.
He let out a forced sigh. "So, we totaled the votes... and we found out that there were 1,086 submissions."
"How…?"
It slipped from my mouth before I realized it. I'd understand it if there ended up being fewer votes than students. Some of them might've abstained, after all. But more? Satoshi nodded gravely.
"I have no idea. Taking into account the absent students, the ones that left early, and those who just didn't want to vote, I wouldn't really care if the total number of votes was any less, but if the number is more than the possible limit, you can't chalk it up to just a simple mistake."
He paused for a second and then continued.
"Someone did this out of spite."
I said nothing in return.
Just as Satoshi had said, judging solely by the information I had at the moment, I found it hard to believe this situation came about due to a simple error. Saying it was out of spite seemed like a bit of a reach, though, and it was probably more likely an impulsive prank or something like that. What did seem certain, however, was that somebody had somehow diluted the votes.
"In reality, the final tally showed that the difference in votes closely corresponded with the number of blank votes, and if the illegitimate ones were all blank, then that meant, of course, that the result wouldn't have changed anyways. The problem is that there isn't any wiggle room with this—if it was proven that something against the rules took place, the election administration committee would have to hold another election. I don't really care who put in the illegitimate votes... Though I can't even begin to comprehend the culprit's reason for doing this, I doubt I'll even be able to figure out who did it in the end. What I have to figure out is how he was even able to cast those votes in the first place."
"The most troubling part of this is that because the management of the official ballots was so half-assed, anyone could've created new ones. All you had to do, after all, was mark the paper with the official stamp, and you could find that lying around in the council room. But how did they manage to slip those ballots in with the rest? There's a hole somewhere in the Kamiyama High School student council president election process. As long as we continue to leave it unsealed, this kind of thing will continue to be possible, and conversely, even if future elections manage to go off without a hitch, we'll never be able to be certain that there wasn't an illegitimate vote submitted somewhere."
"Makes sense."
"I've thought about it a lot myself, but I hit a dead end no matter where I go. That's why, even though I didn't want to, I called you, Houtarou."
Satoshi broke off.
If that's was all he was going to say, then I pretty much got the gist of the situation. I scratched my head and looked up at the moon peeking through the clouds before dropping my gaze down to my feet.
"It looks like I should be getting back now," I said.
The small path continued straight along the river and passed by two bridges. We headed upstream, but how far did it continue like that? I suppose it was already too late to go on an adventure to find the source, though.
"You're going home..." he said, sounding as if he'd almost expected it, "I guess it was a bit too much to ask for, after all."
It wasn't that I thought he was asking for too much; the only problem was that he’d made a mistake. I'm sure he was fully aware of that himself but wanted to put it out there anyways.
"Well, sometimes telling others is all it takes to help yourself understand it better, so I don't mind listening at least. I'd appreciate it if you could leave that for tomorrow, though. I have dirty dishes waiting for me back home, and if I don't take care of them soon, the whole house will end up smelling like sauce."
"It might be a little too late for that."
He had a point. I should open all the windows the second I get home.
A light approached us from the front. It was a bicycle heading in the opposite direction. Until it passed us by, neither of us opened our mouths.
Satoshi finally broke the silence.
"Tomorrow won't work. I need an idea by tomorrow morning."
"Considering that you need to post the results by the end of the day at the latest, I guess I can understand. That should be the election committee's job, though."
A small sigh escaped my lips, and I continued.
"I knew you joined the handicrafts club and general committee for the kicks—something I personally can't understand for the life of me—but I was a little surprised when I heard you became the vice president. I thought you did the general committee activities partly for fun, so I never expected that you of all people would accept an official position. Did something change your mind?"
"Yeah... I guess you could say that."
"I see. I'm not sure if I should congratulate you or not, but that aside, just because you've taken on a role full of responsibilities like that doesn't mean I too want to get involved in any of its problems. Or are you telling me that it's my obligation as a student in our school to help maintain the soundness of our election system?"
He returned a conflicted smile.
"I'd never be able to say something totalitarian like that... Someone like me's much more suited to a bureaucracy."
"I'd say so. A nighttime stroll is certainly an interesting setting for a conversation with Satoshi Fukube, but if it's for a consultation with the general committee vice president, leave it for the committee room."
Satoshi didn't seem all too ruffled by my response, but replied with a hint of loneliness, not necessarily in jest.
"You sure don't mince your words, do you."
It's true that I may have been too harsh, but Satoshi had only himself to blame. If he refused to talk to me without a facade, then I had no choice but to reply in kind with my own—one of rejection of responsibility.
As I thus concluded my theory of the facade, I glanced at him out of the corner of my eye and started to speak.
"So? What are you hiding?"
"Hiding? What do you mean?
Putting aside Satoshi's story of the mysteriously increased votes, two things didn't add up. The first point was what I mentioned earlier: namely, why did he come to me for help? The second point, however, was even more fundamental.
"Don't play dumb. This whole thing should be the election committee's problem. Thinking about it... you should've had nothing to do with it in the first place, Mr. General Committee Vice President."
According to Satoshi's story, the general committee's president and vice president were responsible for nothing more than the simple oversight of the election. The illegitimate votes were certainly a major issue, but why was Satoshi the one trying to solve it? He had remained silent about this point.
To think that Satoshi, self-proclaimed natural denizen of bureaucracy, would rise above his post and pure-heartedly try and unravel the problem plaguing the election system for the sake of justice... I refused to believe it. I suppose it was theoretically possible that he had intervened as a member of the general committee in order to get around the restrictions holding the election committee back, but I was just as ready to crumple that delusion up and throw it out with the rest of the burnable trash on collection day. Satoshi himself said that, since becoming a sophomore, he had changed, but I found it impossible to accept that it was a change that drastic and fundamental. That's why when he, someone who always joked around but never uttered even a word of complaint, called me out at night to ask for help, I knew there was more to the story.
"What i'm saying is that you're hiding the reason why you yourself want to solve the mystery."
Satoshi smiled faintly.
"I just can't win when it comes to you."
I smiled as well.
"I'm glad you've come to terms with it. You shouldn't even be surprised at this point."
"I guess so. I thought I could hide it from you, but so much for that."
Satoshi jumped out a couple steps in front of me as if dancing to some rhythm and then turned around to face me, walking backwards as he spoke.
"I'm sorry I didn't tell you everything from the start, Houtarou, even though I came to you for help. I don't blame you for getting mad. It's not really something I needed to hide, but you know..."
Although I wanted to tell him I had no idea what he was talking about, we've already known each other for a long time now. As vexing as it was, I had the feeling I did.
"The administration committee president is—how can I put this lightly—not really the kind of person that others tend to feel fondly about," said Satoshi as he put his hands together behind his head. "He acts all high and mighty, considering he's on a high school committee, you know? I'm not really sure how to put this... He's the kind of guy that just isn't satisfied without telling someone to 'stop messing around,' even if they're working hard like always. His favorite phrases are: 'Don't go deciding everything for yourself' and 'Figure it out yourself;' I heard them five times already, just today."
I knew there were people like that, but this was the first time I've heard of one my age. If his descriptions were in fact accurate, I'd imagine he was worst case scenario for someone like Satoshi to deal with. He continued.
"Though, you were right, Houtarou. I didn't have anything to do with him."
"Which means... it looks like someone else was involved."
"Sharp as always."
Satoshi gave me a thumbs-up.
"It was a freshman member of the election administration committee, from Class E. I don't remember his name. I probably heard it at some point, but I don't remember. He was a really energetic kid, always saying 'Right away!' when someone asked him to do something. I don't think we would've gotten along, but I could tell he always did what he was supposed to... well... tried, at least. He was pretty short; looked like a middle school student."
"I can see where this is going."
"Can you? Well hear me out until the end, at least. For one reason or another—maybe he was really efficient or his class worked hard to finish quickly—he was the first person to make it to the vote tallying area in the council room. After he got there—and if you ask me it was the president's fault—he messed up the proper procedures."
Satoshi put his hands out in front of him and gestured as if holding an invisible box.
"You probably know this already, considering you voted as well, but in Kamiyama's elections, everyone casts their vote by placing their ballots into the designated ballot boxes. Those boxes are then taken to the council room and—and this is the important part—opened in front of the overseers. Mr. Class 1-E opened the box up before the overseers came and spread out the votes in the middle of the table."
I thought for a moment and then said, "I don't think it's that big a deal, though..."
"Me too. The overseers' sole job is to make sure that the boxes are completely empty, first before taking it to the classrooms to vote and then after taking out the votes, before the tallying begins. I did confirm that Mr. Class 1-E's box was, in fact, empty, so in reality, you could argue that we did actually follow protocol. But the election committee president insisted that there was no way to know for sure that he didn't dilute the votes while the overseers weren't present."
"Putting aside the mistake committed in the procedure, I have a really hard time believing that he was the culprit," I said.
"Everyone else felt the same way. Even I did. But apparently the election committee president didn't. Everything else went according to protocol, so there wasn't any chance for someone to mix in the illegitimate votes with the rest. That's why he decided that the fault couldn't have possibly lain with anyone else, and of course, verbally lashed out at the freshman."
Satoshi suddenly paused for a brief moment and then softly added one more thing.
"The freshman was crying, you know."
So that's what it was...
What it all boiled down to was: Satoshi wanted to prove there was another point at which it would've been possible to mix illegitimate votes in with the rest, even though no one had asked him to, all for the sake of some nameless underclassman who had been verbally abused far beyond the justified amount for his minor mistake.
Completely taken aback, I could only offer this in response:
"I swear... you never change, do you? Always playing the hero in the shadows."
He smiled hesitantly back.
"Give me a break, I just got a little angry, is all. Besides, if you don't mind me making excuses, it wasn't like I felt it was absolutely necessary to rely on your insight. I thought it would've been simple enough for me to handle alone, but I was wrong. It turns out our elections are surprisingly foolproof."
"Didn't we have a similar conversation the last time we went on a nighttime walk like this?"
"Yeah... that was back in our last year of middle school, if I remember correctly. Man, that brings me back."
I stared at Satoshi Fukube. Overall he looked frail and somewhat unreliable, and yet, his expression alone was brimming with confidence—the same Satoshi I've always known.
He wasn't particularly kind or gentle, nor did he even have a strong sense of integrity. In my opinion, however, what he did have, even if it didn't show on his face, was a stronger than normal hatred of the unjust and unfair. Even for things I dismissed with a "Well, that's life," he would furrow his brow and do everything in his power to fix what was within his reach.
That aside, however, I guess I could understand where he was coming from. It wasn't that he was telling me to figure it out as part of some investigation to help return the general committee and Kamiyama elections to a state of normalcy, but rather, he was asking me to help him give the election committee president a good one for the sake of a crying freshman.
Part of me grew a little irritated wondering why he didn't tell me that at the start.
A gust of wind blew through the town.
The path following the river ran up against the wooden fence surrounding a residential house and turned at sharp right angle. We continued to follow it and eventually arrived at a small three-way intersection. The road that stretched to the left and right had a traffic line running down the middle, unlike the one we'd been walking along up until that point, and the entire stretch was brightly illuminated by streetlights. I didn't normally come around this area, but if my memory served me right, if you went right and continued through the residential district, you'd find my old Kaburaya Middle School. If you went left and continued in that direction, you'd eventually reach the downtown area.
We stopped walking and Satoshi looked at me as if asking which way we should go. I was a little worried that someone might start asking questions if we ended up wandering all the way over to the downtown area, but part of me was hesitant to go near Kaburaya for some reason as well. It'd probably be a good idea to go left and then turn onto a different street before hitting the main area. I started to walk and Satoshi silently followed next to me.
"So," I said, restarting the conversation once more, "as far as you know, there were no possible opportunities for anyone to mix in the illegitimate ballots?"
Satoshi suddenly grinned and muttered a barely audible "I really am sorry" before exclaiming in his usual, unaffected voice, "That's right! I really have given it a lot of thought, but in the end, I can't find any real holes in the system, especially considering it's been the same for so long. If I had to say for certain... it's not that I don't consider it a possibility, but I get the feeling that chasing that line of thought will only lead to a dead end."
I wanted to ask him why he thought that in detail, but considering I didn't even know how the student council president election process worked in the first place, I probably wouldn't understand his reasoning. It'd probably be best to get him to explain everything from the start.
"From the beginning, please."
"Okay. Where's a good place..." Satoshi said, his arms crossed and head tilted deliberately in contemplation. "That sounds about right. To start with, it's important to remember that the ballot boxes have locks on them. Also, like I told you earlier, a third party has to confirm that the boxes are empty first before students cast their ballots and then again before the committee counts them."
"You can cast a ballot even while the box is locked, right?"
"Of course. It should've been locked when you voted as well."
I figured that was the case, but I just wanted to make sure.
"The election administration committee took the ballot boxes out of storage and brought them to the council room yesterday after school. The storage room was the one on the first floor of the special wing, so I'm sure you know which one I'm talking about. It also has mops, wax, and the like. Anyways, by yesterday, the paper ballots had already been bundled into a stack for each class with a rubber band holding them together. After school ended for the day, the entire election committee and the overseers gathered in the council room, and the member in charge of distributing everything handed the boxes and ballots to each classes' representatives. I'm sure you're already aware of this, but there are two election committee members—one boy and one girl—in each and every class. That meant that in the council room, there were two members times eight classes times three grades—forty-eight students—plus the two overseers for a total of fifty students, all packed in there like a can of sardines."
"Sounds cramped."
"Pretty much. After getting the ballot boxes, they had us confirm that each one was empty, and then the committee member in charge of the key locked them. After each box was locked, the members waited with them on standby. Once that had finished for all the boxes, the committee president gave the call for each of them to return to their classrooms."
I had seen the boxes and ballot slips, of course. The box was made of worn, amber-colored wood and looked sturdily put together at first glance. The word "ballot box" was written in bold characters along the side. The paper ballots seemed to be cut from simple printer paper. The one I used earlier today didn't even have straight edges. I did remember there being the election administration committee's stamp, but I don't think there was anything like an identification number to tell it apart from the rest.
"You know what the election committee members did in the classrooms, right?" asked Satoshi.
Once in the classrooms, the members placed their ballot box on the teacher's podium and wrote the candidates' names in chalk on the blackboard before handing out the paper ballots. As each of the students finished writing their choice—be it one of the candidates' names or nothing at all—they walked up to the front of the room and individually dropped their slip into the box. Each time this happened, the election committee members drew a tally mark on the paper in their hands to record the total number of votes.
I didn't really want to interrupt Satoshi's story, but I needed to ask him something just in case.
"Do the election administration committee members also have to take into account the number of absent students?"
Satoshi shook his head and said, "From what I've heard, they don't. Apparently, only the total student body count and the total number of votes are important."
I see. I guess some students not showing up to school wouldn't really impact their job, now that I think about it.
"The rules state that after thirty minutes, the members should cast their own votes and then take the ballot boxes back to the council room, but in reality, many of the classes finish much faster than that. After all, once everyone in the class has finished, there's nothing more they have to do, so they can pack up and leave. This part goes against the rules a bit, but there's nothing we can do about that considering it's pretty much a custom at this point."
I suppose if every ballot box was brought back to the council room at the same time, it'd slow down the process as well.
"As a result, the committee members trickle back into the room and check off their grade and class on a list to show who had returned. The person in charge of the key opens their box, and the member empties out its contents onto the table. There were several tables arranged into a cross shape, and we used that to tally the votes. We don't have to return them to storage until tomorrow, so there wasn't any rush. Once the overseers confirm that the box is indeed empty, they place them in the corner of the room. Once all the ballots from every class are on the table, they mix them around so that no one knows which one came from which class and then divide them among ten or so designated vote counters. The counters then place the votes into one of three trays—in this case, marked either "Haruto Obata," "Seiichirou Tsunemitsu," or "N/A." This part goes pretty quickly. The votes are clipped together in groups of twenty and then exchanged with another counter to confirm whether the counting was done correctly. Once both counters finish checking it, the overseers will verify it as well."
"It certainly is thorough."
"I know, right?"
I had no idea why he sounded so proud. We literally just finished talking about how he had nothing to do with the election administration committee.
"After doing that, we wrote down the total numbers on the whiteboard. From start to finish, the whole thing probably took about forty minutes. Just as we were about to record the victor, however, someone pointed out that the final numbers seemed off, and everything after that was pure chaos."
I thought I heard something like the low growl of an engine. All of a sudden, a sports car sped furiously past us on the small modest road. Satoshi glared at it as its tires screeched around the corner and then eventually let out a sigh.
"Everything I told you just now was exactly as it happened, but because there were so many people watching the ballots on the table at all times, I can't imagine it being possible to tamper with anything. That means that the illegitimate votes weren't added during the tallying... And that means the only possibility I can imagine is that they were added to the ballot box from the very start, right?"
"It does look that way, but—"
"But what? I already told you this, but there are about forty-three to forty-four students in each class in Kamiyama High School. There were forty illegitimate votes. If the culprit had only focused on adding them to one box, that'd nearly double the amount it had compared to the other classes. We weren't really focused on the amount of votes that came out from the boxes, but I'm pretty sure everyone would notice if there were twice as much."
I agree. What if it wasn't twice as much, however?
Considering he had been thinking about it ever since school got out today, Satoshi had already considered the possibility.
"It'd be impossible for all of the illegitimate votes to be in one class's box. Then how about if it were split between two classes? We'd still probably notice. Three classes also seem a bit dubious. If they were divided among ten classes, then each class's total would go up by a measly four votes. That'd probably be unnoticeable."
"That might be true, but that then raises the question of how someone would be able to find the chance to slip illegitimate votes into ten ballot boxes."
"Yeah," Satoshi said as he nodded. He then added with a disinterested expression, "Though, honestly speaking, I'm pretty sure the culprit is in the election administration committee."
"I thought you wanted to help out that Class E freshman."
"I don't think it's him. It's just that I can't imagine it happening any other way. Only the election committee dealt with the boxes."
It's true that the committee members move the boxes around, so it'd be simple for them to secretly drop in some votes, but...
"So according to your theory, Satoshi, several election administration committee members colluded with one another to add the illegitimate votes by each putting in a little bit at a time? Sure it's not outside the realm of possibility, but do you really believe that's what happened?"
"That's why I said that line of thought led to a dead end. One or two members is one thing, but I find it impossible to imagine nine or ten being involved in this."
After saying that, Satoshi clapped his hands together and continued.
"So basically, I have no idea where to continue from here. There's no guarantee that someone used a trick to pull it off, but if we assume there is one, I have no other choice but to figure it out, to confirm the shadowy existence lurking within the election committee. If we assume there is no shadowy entity, then we have no further way of figuring out where and how the votes became so skewed. We have until tomorrow morning, but tonight, I want to start from the ground up and flesh this situation out into a proper whodunit. After all, because I had no one else to turn to, I ended up calling you, Houtarou."
Red lights illuminated the night time city before us. Satoshi and I stopped walking at the same time, and we briefly lost track of our conversation as our eyes were held captive by the warm glow. It felt almost as if there were something foreign mixed in with the wind; maybe it was only a figment of my imagination. As he continued to stare at the lights, he suddenly started to speak, his head not moving an inch.
"You hungry?"
I wordlessly stared at the red paper lantern, "Ramen" written in black along its side.
It hadn't even crossed my mind that there might be a trap in a place like this, still so far away from the downtown. O' good children, run quickly on home into your beds now and dream sweet dreams for the night in Kamiyama City is dark and full of terrors.
"We shouldn't give in to evil."
"That's true... Evil things aren't good."
Three minutes later, the two of us were sitting shoulder to shoulder behind a narrow counter. The only things on the menu were regular chashu, and wonton ramen, as well as gyoza, rice, and beer. I ordered the regular ramen, saying, "I didn't really have a normal dinner," to justify it, and Satoshi asked for wonton ramen and a bowl of rice. The shopkeeper had a thick chest and a face the color of sandpaper, and there was a towel tied around his head. As we gave him our order, he responded in a booming voice seemingly coming from the pit of his stomach, "Comin' right up!"
Oil seemed to permeate all throughout the interior of the small shop, and the wallpaper, probably white originally, took on a yellow tint as well. It was only that way from age, however, and not from a lack of cleanliness. There had been another customer, but he passed by us on his way out, so the two of us were the only ones there. I took a sip of cold water from the cup in front of me and suddenly let out a small exhale. I knew we had been walking around during a hot season in a hot place, but I didn't realize I was this thirsty.
"Have you been here before, Houtarou?" asked Satoshi, who had taken to fiddling around with a pepper shaker as he lacked anything else to do.
"No. You?"
"Nope. It's my first time here. I had no idea there was something like this all the way here. It's just that you walked into the shop so confidently... I was sure you were a regular."
"You were so quick when you said we should go in... I was sure you always came here."
Probably hearing our conversation, the owner responded with a bellowing voice, "Come on now. You two won't regret it."
As I zoned out, becoming faintly aware of the light buzzing sound from the ventilation fan attached to the counter, Satoshi started to grumble to himself.
"I don't really care about the culprit... but I wonder why he did it."
"Who knows."
"The student council president doesn't even really do anything in the first place. All he pretty much does is speak as the student representative at events. I'd understand if the culprit got angry at the election because he wanted a change in the school regulations somehow, but what does he think he gains from throwing a wrench in the process?
The only way to know that would probably be to ask the person himself. That said...
"If you’re fine with guesses, I have a couple," I said.
"Let's hear it."
"He loves elections, so he wanted to do it again."
"How intriguing."
"He hates elections, so he wanted to watch it burn."
"He thought student autonomy was a farce and wanted to pose the question on the election's relevance to the student body."
"Terrorism, huh?"
"The candidate he backed wasn't done preparing, so he wanted to buy some time for him."
"The deadline for that had already passed, so that's a no."
"He didn't like the election administration committee president, so he ruined the election to watch him go pale."
Satoshi snickered. "The scary part is I can't really rule that out. At any rate, I guess we don't know his motives. The terrorism one has a certain charm to it, though."
"It could even be a love charm, too."
The owner took out a tied bundle of chashu from the fridge, surprisingly large considering the narrow size of the shop. He took out a kitchen knife and said, "Special service for the students." I guess he was planning on giving us extra. I couldn't wait.
I suddenly asked something that had been on my mind.
"You said there were forty-eight members in the election administration committee, right?"
Satoshi returned the pepper shaker to the rack, rested his cheek on his hand, and responded, "Yeah. Three grades with eight classes each, and two from each of those classes."
"Yet, you also told me that only ten students did the counting."
Satoshi swiveled around on his bar seat to face me somewhat.
"Even with ten counters, that's only about 100 votes per person, so it's plenty possible. Besides, the counting process eats up a lot of space. If we had everyone do it, we'd need the gymnasium."
"How's it decided who does the counting?"
"Um..." He crossed his arms and mumbled. "Within the forty-eight members, half of those are the box carriers. They take the ballot boxes to the classrooms and come back with them when the voting's over. Their jobs end after they open the boxes and pour out the votes, so most of them go home when that's over."
"They didn't stay and watch?"
"Some of them did. The Class 1-E freshman was one of the members that stayed, but it's not like any of them are obligated to."
"You said there were also members in charge of the key and box distribution?"
"Two people take care of the box distribution. Like I said earlier, that includes the person who was in charge of distributing the paper ballots."
"Are the boxes already assigned to a specific grade and class from the start?"
"Nope, the boxes were each handed out to whoever was closest in line. The paper ballots were different, though. The students announced what grade and class they were in and then received their respective stack."
In Kamiyama High School, there were approximately forty-three to forty-four students in one class, though of course that number wasn't always consistent. Having too many or not enough ballots were both concerns, so they probably counted the total number of students in each class beforehand. Naturally, there'd be too many voting slips as a result of the students who were absent or had left early, but that surplus itself had nothing to do with the problem of the illegitimate votes considering that the total number of votes exceeded the total student body count.
"Is it also the box distributor's job to make the ballots?"
Satoshi tilted his head in thought.
"All I did was oversee the process today, so I don't know. What I can say, though, is that there's no way any one person could make over a thousand ballots. I imagine that there were a number of people that split up the work. They cut the paper and marked it with the election committee president's stamp."
"That stamp's the problem. The illegitimate votes had it too."
"That's right. Just like I said at the start, it'd be simple to forge the ballots."
The only reason this whole debacle became about illegitimate votes in the first place was because they had the president's stamp on them. Had there been nothing on the votes that were mixed in, they'd be accepted simply as random, foreign objects. It was necessary to have made the illegitimate votes ahead of time, so if I think about the culprit in this vein, I might be able to come up with something.
—This was what Satoshi wanted to know. In order to restore the dignity of Class 1-E's John Doe, he didn't want to figure out the culprit's name; he wanted to figure out how the illegitimate votes were mixed in with the rest. Of course, it goes without saying that knowing who the perpetrator was would be ideal, but we had neither a list of names nor the manpower or authority to get one in the first place. The most rational way to go about this seemed to be not trying to do the impossible.
"What about the people in charge of the key?"
"There's only one key, so only one person. He closes all twenty-four locks before the elections and opens all twenty-four after it.
"Sounds like he has a lot of free time."
"He does. Maybe it's the perfect job for you, Houtarou."
I wonder about that. Those kinds of jobs make you wait on standby for an excessively long amount of time precisely because there's so little to do, and on top of that, there's a lot of responsibility involved as a result—sounds like a strange way to waste your energy. I'd want to tap out.
"So, within the forty-eight committee members, twenty-four are box carriers, two are box distributors, one is the key carrier, and ten are counters."
"Aside from those, there's the president, the two vice presidents, and the two members who write stuff on the whiteboards."
"So that leaves 6 people without responsibilities."
"Some people took care of various chores and the clean-up. I don't think they have anything to do with it."
Satoshi leaned up close to me.
"With this, we have a general idea of what all forty-eight people we in charge of. This might be a promising lead."
"Who knows. It might get us nowhere, but our conversation just now proved to be a huge help."
"Oh? Why is that?'
Before me sat a bowl of ramen exuding the sweet fragrance of soy sauce. The noodles were thin and wavy and the broth was the deep, dark color. There were two slices of chashu, two pieces of bamboo, and in the center of the bowl was a thick pile of green, freshly boiled spinach.
"One bowl of ramen!"
I took one of the disposable chopsticks and broke them apart with a clean snap. I gazed down upon the chopsticks, beautifully separated with a clean edge, and responded.
"It helped shorten the wait."
"Go ahead and eat. Don't wait for me."
"Will do."
The shop owner wasn't lying when he said we wouldn't regret coming here. There wasn't anything special about it compared to other soy sauce-based ramen, and if anything, it was a bit salty, but it was precisely that aspect of it that made it so satisfying as to befit the dish. I had never seen spinach added as well, but all it took was one bite to make myself wonder why I hadn’t. In addition to that—and I couldn't decide if it was for better or worse—the soup was inexplicably and excessively hot. As Satoshi's wonton ramen came soon after, I exclaimed, "Ouch! That's hot."
"Damn, seriously!" agreed Satoshi in the form of a small cry as he brought the noodles to his lips. He wolfed down around half of it as if in a trance, and then stopped moving his chopsticks to glance furtively at me, looking like he was checking to see if I had slowed down..
"By the way, and this is unrelated, but—"
The noodles were delicious... I've never been this fully aware of the taste of ramen. I don't think it was even the taste itself. Maybe the texture?
"Are you listening?"
"Yeah"
"These wontons are amazing."
"Gimme one."
"Back off. But yeah, did you know? Apparently Chitanda was talking about running for student council president."
My chopsticks stopped for a moment and then resumed.
"News to me."
Satoshi blew on the wontons a couple times to cool them down and then swallowed them in a smooth gulp.
"I guess she was pretty popular back at Inji Middle School, and she's from an important family in Jinde, after all. Her grades are amazing, and she's really likable. Rumor has it that even the head instructor was seeing if she'd run. She made a name for herself during the string of culture festival incidents, and that was only magnified when the news of her participating in the Living Dolls Festival got out. All that's really missing is her club activity track record."
It's probably true that being the Classics Club president didn't do much for you in that department.
"I'm not saying I know everything about her—"
I picked up the hot tangle of noodles and held them over the bowl to cool them naturally.
"—but I don't think she's the kind of person capable of doing what a student council president needs to do, practically speaking."
"It was Mayaka who took the helm with the anthology, too. But that's no different. Some would say that if the president was well liked by others, that'd be enough; all you'd have to do is support them in doing those things."
Something like a decorative portable shrine, huh? It felt like him calling the student council president a purely symbolic entity was something of a joke, but considering we did have the domineering election committee president as an example, I couldn't exactly rule out what he said as being a possibility.
"Well, she ended up not running."
"Yep. Just like you said, Houtarou, apparently Chitanda didn't feel she was the right person for the job. That said, it looks like she was interested in if being the student council president came in handy after graduating."
"Came in handy... like for a recommendation?"
I heard that being a student council president made getting college recommendations simple. Though, I couldn't for the life of me understand why she'd be considering running for president with college entrance exams in mind.
Satoshi chuckled and waved his hands dismissively.
"I doubt it."
"Apparently it was more along the lines of the experience representing Kamiyama High School helping her when she inherits her family's estate."
I ran out of noodles. I wanted to pick up the bowl and drink the broth, but it was still too hot. I absentmindedly gazed at the owner washing the dishes and the large pot of boiling water.
An heiress, huh? The world she lives in is so far removed from that of common sense. Even though I've come to bear witness to the circumstances that have enveloped her, even now, I can’t fully grasp it. When I try, I can't help but be astounded that something like that exists in this day and age. To Chitanda, however, that very word, "heiress," was her reality.
"Yeah..." muttered Satoshi with soft indifference as he slurped down the wonton ramen, "I wonder what I should be."
After a second failed attempt to pick up the bowl due to its combined weight and heat, I spotted some spoons next to the pepper shaker. I took one immediately and scooped up a mouthful.
"How about a lawyer?"
"A lawyer?"
Satoshi's voice burst out crazily as if someone had told him there was a mythical creature nearby.
"Haha, where the heck did that idea come from?"
The ramen in this shop has certainly piqued my interest. I'd have to try the wonton ramen next time if that's what it did to Satoshi. I had scooped up so much broth that it looked like it'd easily flow over the edge of the spoon, so I tilted it back and forth to empty it a little.
"'Cause you're a hero in the shadows."
"According to you..."
"A lawyer was just the first thing that came to mind. If not that... then how about a hitman? Striking down evildoers with a single blow under the veil of the night."
"Ha... ha..."
With a dry laugh, Satoshi returned to his wonton noodles. We had been eating at pretty much the same pace, but he still had his rice left. It looked like we'd be here a while longer.
A pair of flushed faced men in business suits walked into the shop that formerly only had the two of us. The owner called out, "Welcome!" Likely drunk, the men yelled in purposely obnoxious voices:
"Two bowls o' ramen!"
"An' two pints. Ya have any snacks?"
I felt like I heard Satoshi mumble something amidst the instantly lively shop interior.
"I hadn't considered that option... Interesting."
I wonder if I had inadvertently brought a hitman into this world.
As we left the shop, the lukewarm breeze of a June night blew by, gently rocking the red paper lantern back and forth. Satoshi had tried to pay for my meal, calling it a consultation fee, but I shot down his attempt. A consultation fee... can you believe it?! The nerve of this guy sometimes. This part of him wasn't good in the slightest. It was a good thing I had the foresight to stash away a couple thousand yen notes before coming.
The loose change in my shirt pocket clinked delicately together with every movement I made. Satoshi looked all around him and then peered down at his watch.
"It's gotten pretty late. I guess we should head home soon. Sorry for calling you out at a time like this."
"I don't mind. I mean, all I have to do at home is wash all the dishes and the entire bathroom."
"You're mad, aren't you..."
"Not at all. If we're going back, could you walk me home? It's too scary to go alone."
This joke went over surprisingly well with him.
This last April, Satoshi found himself visiting my house due to an unexpected series of events. It wasn't like he made any more visits after that, so I imagine he wouldn't remember the exact streets to take in order to get there, but I'm sure he knew the approximate direction.
"Okay, let's go, then," he said, starting to walk before I did.
It looked like it'd be a pretty easy walk to my house from the ramen shop using the sidewalk along the wide road. The soft glow of the streetlights brought the vivid lights of winter to my mind and caused me to remember the ever encroaching summer. A small police car drove by along the traffic-less street, and although it gave me a small scare, it continued by without stopping to reprimand us for being out so late.
"I've been thinking," I started to say, "no matter how much I try to imagine when it was possible for someone to put in the illegitimate votes, I always find myself at a dead end. Due to the fact that the boxes were examined, I can't possibly imagine that the ballots were set there in advance. Besides, any box that had forty more ballots added to it would easily stand out from the rest and splitting that across ten ballot boxes would require a lot of help."
Although I was merely repeating what Satoshi had told me earlier, he nodded back in earnest.
"Exactly. I can't get any further than that."
"Then we have no choice but to change our approach."
From where did the votes that exceeded the total student body count come from?
At what point were they mixed in?
Suddenly, Satoshi blurted out, "I see."
"This is just a guess, but what if the ballots were on the table from the very beginning?"
That theory of mine was all it took to tragically deflate Satoshi's enthusiasm.
"No, that'd be impossible," he continued. "Of course, that's as long as if there weren't any unseen ballots on the publicly scrutinized table."
"I doubt there were any unseen ballots. What if there was an unseen committee member, however?"
Satoshi scrunched his eyes.
"You mind if I ask what the heck you're talking about?"
"Not at all."
The sidewalk crossed in the front of an abandoned gas station. The desolate appearance of the concrete structure's unoccupied vastness invited a strange feeling of unease.
"From what I've heard so far about the election process, there are two big flaws. If I took advantage of them, I'm pretty sure even I'd be able to mix in some illegitimate votes."
Although I assumed he was going to say something, Satoshi was dead silent. Maybe he was trying not to interrupt. Whatever the case, I continued.
"The first one was the checkpoint for the committee members who were bringing back their ballot boxes from the classrooms. After that was the confirmation by multiple people to make sure that the boxes were empty and that the ballots were bundled in exact groups of twenty. However, the verification for each returning member's 'grade and class' wasn't done in the same way. If what you said was correct, then that part of the process was done by the individual."
According to Satoshi, the committee members trickle back into the room and check off their grade and class on a list to show who had already returned.
"The paper they marked likely only listed the class names with a circle or cross or whatever next to them. Although it's the same election administration committee, I doubt they all remember each other's faces. Had even I, hypothetically speaking, gone to the council room with the Class 2-A box and checked off my class, I probably wouldn't attract much suspicion."
Satoshi's low mumbling voice seemed stuck in his throat.
"You might be right about that, Houtarou... Sure enough, no one confirmed that the person who left with a certain box was the same person who arrived with it."
"The ballots are the important part, however. Strictly speaking, it doesn't matter who carries the boxes; that has no bearing on the election. The class list was also only for the express purpose of making sure that all of the boxes had returned."
"That's true," Satoshi nodded, deep in thought. "The ballots are the important part. This flaw that you pointed out is by no means minor, but it still doesn't answer the question behind when someone could have added the illegitimate votes."
"That's when the second flaw becomes important."
I tried to imagine what took place today after school, when, before the elections, the election committee members received their boxes—sturdily constructed boxes made of worn, amber-colored wood.
"You said that the boxes weren't assigned to any class in particular before handing them out."
"Yeah, I did."
Earlier, he had told me they were each handed out to whoever was closest in line.
"Is that a problem?" he continued.
"Distributing the boxes randomly isn't a problem in and of itself. The same thing goes for having the committee members check themselves in after returning to the council room. If you combine the two, however, what do you think would happen?"
Satoshi crossed his arms and stared up at the cloudy sky as he silently walked. He was about to collide with a telephone pole, so I tugged on his sleeve to move him out of the way.
"So what you're saying, Houtarou, is that one of the students who returned to the council room with a box might not have been an election committee member? I'm not so sure that has anything to do with the boxes being randomly distributed, though..."
"You're a little off. That's not what I meant to say."
It wasn't like I was trying to quiz Satoshi or anything, so there was no point in withholding the answer. The reason I repeated my question was so I could say everything properly in order without having it end up convoluted in my head.
"What I meant was: the election system wouldn't be able to account for the votes, even if a student who wasn't an election committee member carried in a box that wasn't assigned to any classes."
After a moment of bewilderment, Satoshi's eyes grew wide.
"Unbelievable, Houtarou, that's not simple to pull off, you know?"
According to my understanding of the Kamiyama High School student council president elections as Satoshi had explained it, there were countless measures in place to prevent the mismanagement and incorrect counting of the ballots. If you assume, however, that a fake election committee member brought a fake ballot box, there were no countermeasures to stand in his way.
"Wait, hold on." Satoshi threw out his opened hand, palm facing me. "Isn't that a little strange? It's true that the election committee members don't have armbands or anything like that, so it'd be pretty easy to pose as one, but what would they do about a box? I don't know how long they've been in use, but I know for certain that they're old. They're not the kind of thing you could whip up overnight. If a student came in with some generic, old box, it'd be difficult not to notice."
He paused for a little and then continued.
"Moreover, it'd also be bad to assume that the culprit stealthily carried his ballot box into the room, added the illegitimate votes into the mix, and then left as if it didn't concern him. After they're completely emptied, the ballot boxes are collected and then piled up in the council room. It's impossible to get away with something like that unless you have a proper box."
"That's right. Essentially, as long as there was a box aside from the twenty-four used in this year's election—an amber-colored box with a lock and the words "ballot box" written along its side—it'd be possible."
"Where would you find a box like that?"
Where? Well...
"Probably in the storage room on the first floor of the special wing."
After all, that's where the ballot boxes were supposedly kept.
Wearing a visibly irritated expression, Satoshi stamped his feet on the ground with every step he took.
"That's where we had the boxes for this year's election—not your supposed ones."
I also grew irritated. Who's to say that there were only exactly twenty-four ballot boxes in the storage room? Why wasn't it getting through to him? As I thought this, it suddenly dawned on me. I see. It wasn't Satoshi's fault he didn't understand. These were family matters.
"A postcard came for my sister."
"Wha—" Satoshi stared at me, dumbfounded by the sudden change in conversation. "Oh, yeah. Uh, how's she been doing?"
"Good. Thanks for asking. She went back to college, so she's not home at the moment, and yet a postcard arrived at the house for her. What a hassle. I'm going to have to leave it in a place I remember until she gets back."
"Why don't you just forward it to her...?"
The shock convulsed throughout my entire body. Of course, it was all so simple. Why don't I just forward it to her? How did I not see it before?
"Oh, sorry. I was just a bit surprised. Getting back to the subject at hand, that postcard was a notice about her class reunion."
Satoshi looked unsatisfied, as if wanting to ask how mentioning that was getting back to the subject at hand.
"Um, listen..."
"It was for class 3-I."
A large RV, blasting energetic hip hop from its windows, drove past us. Satoshi opened up both of his hands in front of him and started to fold his fingers down one-by-one. A, B, C, D...
"So that's what it was. Nine classes..."
"Kamiyama High School having eight classes per grade is something that's only the case right now. Previously, it had nine classes, and possibly at some other point, it even had ten. It's possible that next year it'll have seven classes, and eventually six after that."
"I see. It was so obvious. The number of students... number of children is changing, but the school continues to exist as is."
We recognized ourselves as existing in Kamiyama High School. That wasn't incorrect, strictly speaking, but the thing was, however, the school continued to exist without a single regard for our existences. There was a point at which there were nine classes in a single grade, and that time had student council elections as well. Judging by the ballot box's worn state, it'd be safe to assume they've used those boxes all the way since then.
I can’t imagine they'd throw away the extra box. It was possible, after all, that Kamiyama would once again enter an age of nine classes per grade.
"In the storage room on the first floor of the special wing sleep the ballot boxes from an age when there more students than there are now. The culprit knew that, took one of the boxes, put the illegitimate votes in it, posed as an election committee member, and then carried it to the council room."
"He didn't write anything on the list of class names. Although the box should've been locked, and it had to have been opened by the key the election committee member was in charge of."
"There's only one key after all. It makes sense that all the boxes would be opened by the same one. Check the pile of ballot boxes in the council room first thing tomorrow, and if there are indeed twenty-five, that'll be your proof. There was no time to return it, after all."
If you were to realize that extra ballot boxes existed as a relic of Kamiyama's past, it wasn't all that difficult to see through the trick behind the illegitimate votes. Because I had an older sister who came from the same school, I was able to see Kamiyama High School as yet another thing in within the flow of time, however for Satoshi, who only had a younger sister, he was late to realize that fact. That's all there was to it, but even then, it left a bad taste in my mouth. Even though I thought I would've been already all too familiar with the passage of time, it was almost as if I were being told, "Maybe you don't truly understand the meaning behind it after all."
"I was too fixated on what was in the box... Something was missing,” Satoshi muttered under his breath.
I shrugged in response to his strangely contemplative comment, and the movement caused the coins in my shirt pocket to clink delicately together.
From what he told me later on, Satoshi informed the general committee president of the hypothesis we put together that same night, and the president told the election administration committee president in turn. It seemed that the election committee president was suspicious of the freshman from Class 1-E all the way to the bitter end, but because they did in fact count twenty-five boxes in the council room, by then, he stopped being so obstinate.
The hole in the system was sealed and the election held once again, resulting in Seiichirou Tsunemitsu stepping up to assume the position as the new student council vice president. In his acceptance speech, given over a schoolwide broadcast during lunch, there wasn't a single mention of that trouble that had previously transpired.
We don't know who casted the illegitimate votes. In the words of Satoshi himself, "Figuring that out is the election committee's job. I have nothing to do with it."
I was wholly in agreement.
Return to Main Page Forward to The Mirror Can't Reflect (Temp. link to Tumblr translation.)
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line915
|
__label__wiki
| 0.923591
| 0.923591
|
Lesotho Premier to Resign as Police Probe Wife’s Murder
Mathabiso Ralengau
Lesotho’s prime minister said he intends to step down, following increased calls for his resignation over the murder of his second wife, which police have linked to the woman he married a little over two months later.
Thomas Thabane, 80, was inaugurated as prime minister of the tiny African mountain kingdom two days after his second wife was shot in June 2017. He previously held the post from 2012 to 2015, but fled to South Africa in 2014 after an alleged coup attempt.
“I have decided to retire from my position as the prime minister of Lesotho, and the time of my retirement will be officially announced when that time comes,” Thabane said in the capital, Maseru, on Friday. His decision to resign had already been announced the previous day by Communications Minister Thesele Maseribane.
Earlier this month, court documents showed that the country’s police chief asked Thabane to clarify why his mobile phone number was linked to the crime scene, naming Thabane’s current wife, Maesiah Thabane, as a suspect in the killing. Thabane had issued a notice to replace the police chief but withdrew it after the Lesotho High Court intervened.
Maesiah has been on the run since the police issued an arrest warrant last week. Neither she nor her husband have commented on the murder case.
The opposition on Wednesday said it would organize protests if Thabane doesn’t resign within seven days, while a faction within his All Basotho Convention also urged him to step down.
Lesotho, which is surrounded by South Africa, has one of the highest murder rates on the continent.
Follow All The Political News In India On BloombergQuint
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line920
|
__label__wiki
| 0.795516
| 0.795516
|
Frank Oliver Bezanson1,2
M, #20881, b. 5 February 1927, d. 16 January 2020
Reference: Bezansons from Nova Scotia ID # 461.3
Father* Arthur Elroy Bezanson2 b. 15 May 1896, d. 23 Oct 1963
Mother* Gertrude Crouse2 b. 1894, d. 5 Oct 1981
Betty Joan Banks
(?) Bezanson5 b. 22 Oct 1952, d. 23 Oct 1952
Relationship 4th great-grandson of Jean George Bezanson
Frank Oliver Bezanson
Frank Oliver Bezanson was born on 5 February 1927.2 He was an heir to the estate of William Oliver Bezanson.4 Frank Oliver Bezanson married Betty Joan Banks on 5 May 1950. He was 23.5 Frank Oliver Bezanson died on 16 January 2020 at Grand View Manor, Berwick, Nova Scotia, at age 92.1
Obituary from The Chronicle-Herald (Halifax, Nova Scotia), 20 January 2020:
With great sadness, the family of Frank Oliver Bezanson, 92 of Berwick, announce his passing on January 16, 2020 in the Grand View Manor. Born on February 5, 1927, he was the son of the late Arthur Elroy and Mary Gertrude Bezanson in Berwick, Nova Scotia.
Frank attended Horton Academy and eventually graduated from the Maritime Business Academy in Halifax in 1948. He returned home to run the Berwick Bakery, which his parents had founded in 1927. He worked alongside his older brother, Gerald until it was sold to Eastern Bakeries in 1967. Under the management of Gerald and Frank, the bakery continued the family tradition of supporting Berwick sports teams, contributing to the upkeep of Rainforth Park and assisting in other Town of Berwick initiatives. In recognition of their support, the Bezanson Family, A.E., Gertrude, Gerald and Frank, were inducted into the Berwick Sports Hall of Fame in 2008. After retiring from the Bakery, Frank sold insurance for the Kings Mutual Insurance Company.
Although an avid traveler, Frank lived in Berwick his entire life. Along with Joan, he travelled from one end of North America to the other visiting family and seeing the vast sights. In 1972, he took his family to England and Scotland. Frank and Joan spent winters Florida later in life.
Frank loved animals; he owned horses and dogs as a young man and could be seen walking his grand puppy through Berwick up until his health no longer allowed. He had a green thumb and shared the bounty of an extensive vegetable garden with many members of the community. Frank and Joan were skilled dancers and they loved the big band sounds of the 1940’s and 1950’s. Beyond being a competent baker, it was his duty to make bake beans every Saturday of his married life.
Frank was a member of the Berwick Lion’s Club and the Berwick Curling Club. He chaired the Berwick Board of Trade for two years starting in 1959. He was also a town councillor for The Town of Berwick. Frank was a strong supporter of Berwick Gala Days and could be seen selling hot dogs on the grounds in his baker’s hat.
He will be forever missed by his family and we will remember his infectious smile and laugh.
Frank is survived by his loving wife Betty Joan (Banks). They were married in 1950 and would have celebrated their 70th wedding anniversary on May 5th, 2020. He is survived by his children Ric (Kathy), Mary Susan, Nancy Lee and Birdie Jane. Frank is also survived by his brother Gerald, nephews Greg (Pat), Peter (Patricia) and Danny (Sandy) and his sister-in-law Iris (Schrier)) Banks and her children, Paul (Eugenia), Danni (John) and Jenny (Pat). Frank has nine grandchildren: Laurie (Graham) Guard, Lacey (Tom) Johns, Hazen and Joanie Murray, Jana (Costa) Kreakakos, Devon Bezanson, Nick (Jen) Bezanson, Meagan (Kenny) MacDonald, and Matthew (Heather) Sinclair. Frank’s seven great grandchildren brought a smile to his face until his last days: Ella and Ryann (Laurie), Dallas and Knox (Meagan), Juno and Frankie (Lacey), Ellis (Jana), and Rosie Katherine (Nick). He will be forever missed by his family; we will remember his infectious smile and laugh and his generous, loyal nature.
The family would like to thank the Grand View Manor for their kindness and dedication.
A Funeral Service will be held on Tuesday, January 21, 2020 at 2:00 pm in the Berwick Baptist Church. Reception will follow service in the Church Annex. Family Flowers only. Arrangements have been entrusted to Serenity Funeral Home, Berwick Funeral Chapel, 192 Commercial Street, Berwick, NS.1
[S2] Frank Oliver Bezanson Death Notice, The Chronicle-Herald (Halifax, Nova Scotia), 20 January 2020.
[S1] Dorothy Evans, Bezansons from Nova Scotia, 175, 239.
[S1] Dorothy Evans, Bezansons from Nova Scotia, 175.
[S352] Family History Committee, Probate Records of Kings County, BEZANSON, William O, Date=7 Oct 1943, PlaceOfDeath=Berwick, Residence=Berwick, FileID=PRO B-356.
Gwladys Louise Waterbury Troop1
F, #20882, b. 15 May 1906, d. 4 March 1982
Dr. Corey Seldon Bezanson b. 16 Dec 1897, d. 16 Oct 1957
Gwladys Louise Waterbury Troop was born on 15 May 1906.2 She married Dr. Corey Seldon Bezanson on 28 June 1927. She was 21. He was 29.1 Gwladys Louise Waterbury Troop died on 4 March 1982 at age 75.1,2 She was buried in Aylesford Union Cemetery, Aylesford, Nova Scotia.2
Last Edited 24 Jun 2001
[S1] Dorothy Evans, Bezansons from Nova Scotia, 91.
[S351] Family History Committee, Cemetery Records of Kings County, Aylesford Union Cemetery, Section 1, Stone 42, "Corey Seldon Bezanson, M.D. 16 Dec 1897 - 16 Oct 1957. His wife Gwladys Louise Waterbury (Troop), May 15 1906 - Mar 4 1982."
Clayton Whittier1
M, #20883, b. February 1897, d. 4 April 1947
Father* George A. Whittier b. c 1868
Mother* Annie Etta Bezanson1 b. 25 Feb 1869, d. 25 Mar 1953
Relationship 3rd great-grandson of Jean George Bezanson
Clayton Whittier was born in February 1897.1 He died on 4 April 1947 at Berwick, Nova Scotia, at age 50.2
Census Summary
Census, Residence
Census 1911 Clayton Whittier appeared on the census of 1911 in the household of Stephen Haines and Annie Etta Bezanson at Farmington, Nova Scotia.1
[S5] 1911 Canadian Census; Farmington, Lunenburg, Nova Scotia; Family: 33; Page: 3; Line: 50; Page:L 4; Lines: 1-5.
[S14] Nova Scotia Archives and Records Management (NSARM), "Death Registrations", George Clayton Whittier; Registration Year: 1947; Page: 3070.
Harold Chester Whittier1
M, #20884, b. September 1899
Father* George A. Whittier1 b. c 1868
Harold Chester Whittier was born in September 1899.2
Census 1911 Harold Chester Whittier appeared on the census of 1911 in the household of Stephen Haines and Annie Etta Bezanson at Farmington, Nova Scotia.2
[S1] Dorothy Evans, Bezansons from Nova Scotia, 38, 91.
Ralph Waldo Haines1
M, #20885, b. 3 November 1911, d. 8 December 2005
Father* Stephen Haines1 b. 24 Mar 1865, d. 25 Mar 1934
Mona Mae Young
Ralph Waldo Haines was born on 3 November 1911.1 He married Mona Mae Young.1 Ralph Waldo Haines died on 8 December 2005 at Harbour View Haven, Lunenburg, Nova Scotia, at age 94.2 He was buried on 12 December 2005 in Martin's Brook Cemetery, Martin's Brook, Nova Scotia.2
Obituary from The Chronicle-Herald (Halifax, Nova Scotia), 9 December 2005:
HAINES, Ralph Waldo - 94, Martin's Brook, Lunenburg Co., died Thursday, December 8, 2005, in Harbour View Haven, Lunenburg.
Born in New Germany, he was a son of the late Steven and Annie Etta (Bezanson Whittier) Haines. He was a member of Calvary Temple Pentecostal Church, Mahone Bay, a veteran of the Second World War and a member of the Unity Lodge No. 4 of the Masonic Order, with a 55 year service award. Waldo started work as a carpenter with Maritime Manufacturers, Mader's Cove, as a cabinet maker. He later worked on the Dew Line as a carpenter and then as a lighthouse keeper on Cross Island for 14 years.
He is survived by sons, Arnold and wife Carolyn, Martin's River; Gerald and wife Elizabeth, Nepean, Ont; six grandchildren; eight great-grandchildren; one great great-grandchild.
He was predeceased by wife, Mona Mae (Young) Haines; half-brothers, Clayton and Harold Whittier, and Stewart and Harold Haines. Funeral arrangements are under the direction of Dana L. Sweeny Funeral Home, Lunenburg, with visiting hours Saturday from 7-9 p.m. and Sunday from 7-9 p.m., and where the funeral service will be held at 3 p.m. on Monday, Rev. James Haughn officiating. Interment will be in Martin's Brook Cemetery, Martin's Brook.2
Census 1921 Ralph Waldo Haines appeared on the census of 1921 in the household of Stephen Haines and Annie Etta Bezanson at Herman's Isle, Nova Scotia.3
[S2] Ralph Waldo Haines Death Notice, The Chronicle-Herald (Halifax, Nova Scotia), 9 December 2005.
[S5] 1921 Canadian Census; Lunenburg (Municipality), Lunenburg, Nova Scotia; Reference Number: RG 31; Folder Number: 46; Page: 9; Lines: 10-12.
Charles Anthony Bezanson1
M, #20887, b. 6 March 1888, d. 22 June 1944
Father* Alonzo Bezanson1 b. 21 Apr 1870, d. 29 May 1942
Mother* Mary Ann Howard1 b. 18 Jul 1869, d. b 30 Mar 1913
Catherine Matthews b. c 1891, d. 24 Feb 1920
Marjorie Bezanson+14 b. c 1911
Claire Bezanson+8 b. c 1914, d. 13 Mar 2004
Mary Bezanson15 b. c 1917
Jessie Revels b. c 1906
Brother Thomas Bezanson15 b. 5 Aug 1929, d. 16 Aug 2007
Reginald Thomas Bezanson+8 b. 1931, d. 1980
Sharon Lorraine Bezanson15 b. 19 Mar 1932, d. 21 Mar 2013
Marianne Bezanson+8 b. 1937, d. 9 Oct 1990
Charles Anthony Bezanson was born on 6 March 1888.3,4,5 He married twice, and a confusing census entry indicates he may have married a third time. It is not completely clear from the evidence I have reviewed which children were born to which wives. He married Catherine Matthews on 31 January 1911 at Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. He was 22.6,1 Charles Anthony Bezanson married Jessie Revels on 14 May 1928 at St. Patrick's Church, Halifax, Nova Scotia. He was 40.7,8 Charles Anthony Bezanson died on 22 June 1944 at Victoria General Hospital, Halifax, Nova Scotia, at age 56. The informant on his death certificate was Jessie Revels.9,1 Charles Anthony Bezanson was buried on 26 June 1944 in Mount Olivet Cemetery, Halifax, Nova Scotia.10
Census 1891 Charles Anthony Bezanson appeared on the census of 1891 in the household of Alonzo Bezanson and Mary Ann Howard at Halifax, Nova Scotia.3
Census 1901 Charles Anthony Bezanson appeared on the census of 1901 in the household of Alonzo Bezanson and Mary Ann Howard.11
Census 1911 Charles Anthony Bezanson appeared on the census of 1911 in the household of Alonzo Bezanson and Mary Ann Howard at Halifax, Nova Scotia.12
Census 1921 Charles Anthony Bezanson and Catherine Matthews appeared on the census of 1921 at 20 Gray Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia, with Marjorie Bezanson, Claire Bezanson, Mary Bezanson and Alonzo Bezanson. There is something amiss here, however, because Catherine Matthews died in 1920 according to her death certificate. She cannot be the "Kathrine" listed in the census, unless someone reported her to be alive when she was not. The Marital Status for Charles seems to be "2m", i.e., his second marriage.13
Last Edited 5 May 2016
[S1] Dorothy Evans, Bezansons from Nova Scotia, 92, 179.
[S5] 1891 Canadian Census; Ward 6a, Halifax City, Nova Scotia; Roll: T-6314; Family: 3; Page: 1.
[S1] Dorothy Evans, Bezansons from Nova Scotia, 92, 179, but get out your calculater again because the year could be 1883, as it was calculated from his age at death which was either 54 or 57.
[S617] Automated Genealogy, "1901 Census of Canada", Schedule 1 Microfilm T-6451, District=NS HALIFAX, Subdistrict=Halifax (City/Cité) Ward/Quartier No. 5 e-1 Page 12, Line=40, Family=128.
[S13] Nova Scotia Archives and Records Management (NSARM), "Marriage Registrations", Mathews, Cathleen; Bezanson, Charles; Registration Year: 1911; Book: 1821; Page: 84; Number: 41.
[S13] Nova Scotia Archives and Records Management (NSARM), "Marriage Registrations", Bezanson, Charlie; Revells, Jessie; Registration Year: 1928; Book: 52; Page: 270.
[S14] Nova Scotia Archives and Records Management (NSARM), "Death Registrations", Bezanson, Charles; Registration Year: 1944; Book: 219; Page: 526.
[S681] Catholic Cemeteries Commission, "Internment Database."
[S5] 1901 Canadian Census; Halifax (City/Cité) Ward/Quartier No 5, Halifax (city/cité), Nova Scotia; Family: 128; Page: 12.
[S5] 1911 Canadian Census; Ward 5, Halifax, Nova Scotia; Family: 88; Page: 9.
[S5] 1921 Canadian Census; Halifax (City), Halifax, Nova Scotia; District: 66; Page: 14; Lines: 14-19.
Catherine Matthews1
F, #20888, b. circa 1891, d. 24 February 1920
Father* Henry Matthews1
Mother* Mary (?)1
Charles Anthony Bezanson b. 6 Mar 1888, d. 22 Jun 1944
Marjorie Bezanson+6 b. c 1911
Mary Bezanson8 b. c 1917
Catherine Matthews was born circa 1891 at Dartmouth, Nova Scotia.2,1 She married Charles Anthony Bezanson on 31 January 1911 at Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. He was 22.2,1 Catherine Matthews died on 24 February 1920 at Halifax, Nova Scotia.3 The cause of death was pneumonia.3 She was buried on 25 February 1920 in Holy Cross Cemetery, Halifax, Nova Scotia.3
Census 1911 Catherine Matthews appeared on the census of 1911 in the household of Alonzo Bezanson and Mary Ann Howard at Halifax, Nova Scotia.4
Census 1921 Charles Anthony Bezanson and Catherine Matthews appeared on the census of 1921 at 20 Gray Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia, with Marjorie Bezanson, Claire Bezanson, Mary Bezanson and Alonzo Bezanson. There is something amiss here, however, because Catherine Matthews died in 1920 according to her death certificate. She cannot be the "Kathrine" listed in the census, unless someone reported her to be alive when she was not. The Marital Status for Charles seems to be "2m", i.e., his second marriage.5
[S14] Nova Scotia Archives and Records Management (NSARM), "Death Registrations", Bezanson, Catherine; Registration Year: 1920; Book: 70; Page: 460.
Alonzo John Bezanson1,2
M, #20891, b. circa February 1890, d. 20 September 1890
Alonzo John Bezanson was born circa February 1890.2,1 He died on 20 September 1890.2,1 The cause of death was acute bronchitis.2
[S1] Dorothy Evans, Bezansons from Nova Scotia, 92, where the child's name is John or Alonzo John. He died at 7 mos. old, according to the cited Halifax Herald obituary.
[S14] Nova Scotia Archives and Records Management (NSARM), "Death Registrations", Bezanson, Alonzo; Registration Year: 1890; Page: 5; Number: 81.
Osborne Bezanson1
M, #20894, b. 10 November 1888, d. 27 February 1961
Father* Stephen J. Bezanson1 b. Jun 1862, d. 30 Sep 1950
Mother* Katherine Cumming1 b. Jul 1866, d. Feb 1941
Edith Perry Buel b. 11 Dec 1887, d. 3 Aug 1943
Harold Bezanson16 b. 1 Jul 1913, d. 18 Nov 1914
Robert Osborne Bezanson+16 b. 8 Oct 1914, d. 14 Oct 1988
Elizabeth Bezanson16 b. 1917, d. 2 Oct 2006
Dorothea Bezanson+16 b. 26 Feb 1921, d. 3 Jun 2009
Richard Buel Bezanson+16 b. 28 Feb 1924, d. 17 Jan 1997
Marguerite Inez Crouse b. 14 Feb 1909, d. 15 Sep 2004
Osborne Bezanson was born on 10 November 1888 at Woburn, Massachusetts.2,3,4 He married Edith Perry Buel on 11 September 1912 at Woburn, Massachusetts. He was 23. She was 24.5,1 Osborne Bezanson was President of Monsanto Chemical, Texas.1 He became a widower at age 54 upon the death of his wife Edith Perry Buel on 3 August 1943 at Woburn, Massachusetts.6,7 Osborne Bezanson married Marguerite Inez Crouse on 27 May 1944 at Dallas, Texas. He was 55. She was 35.8,1,9 Osborne Bezanson died on 27 February 1961 at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, at age 72.10,4
Obituary from The Nashua Telegraph (Nashua, New Hampshire), 28 February 1961:
OSBORNE BEZANSON
Boston, Feb 28 (AP) - Osborne Bezanson. 72, retired president and chairman of the board of Chemstrand Corp, died yeserday in Massachusetts General Hospital.
Bezanson had been ranching in Tatum, Tex, since retiring in 1934. At one time he was employed by the Merrimack Chemical co of Woburn, Mass.
He was stricken five days ago while he and his wife were visiting their son, Stephen, at Phillips Exeter Academy.
He also leaves his widow, two other sons. Robert of New Boston, NH, and Richard B. of Winchester, and two daughters, Mrs Urshal Gannon of Wyckoff. NJ, and Mrs Bernard Kane, of Boston, NH.
Funeral services and burial will be in Marshall, Tex.10
Census 1900 Osborne Bezanson appeared on the census of 1900 in the household of Stephen J. Bezanson and Katherine Cumming at Hart Place, Woburn, Middlesex County, Massachusetts.11
Census 1910 Osborne Bezanson appeared on the census of 1910 in the household of Stephen J. Bezanson and Katherine Cumming at 21 Hart Place, Woburn, Middlesex County, Massachusetts.12
Census 1920 Osborne Bezanson and Edith Perry Buel appeared on the census of 1920 at 77 Elm Street, Woburn, Massachusetts, with Robert Osborne Bezanson and Elizabeth Bezanson.13
Census 1930 Osborne Bezanson and Edith Perry Buel appeared on the census of 1930 at 628 Main Street, Woburn, Massachusetts, with Robert Osborne Bezanson, Elizabeth Bezanson, Dorothea Bezanson, Richard Buel Bezanson and Donald Bezanson.14
Census 1940 Osborne Bezanson and Edith Perry Buel appeared on the census of 1940 at 628 Main Street, Woburn, Massachusetts, with Elizabeth Bezanson, Dorothea Bezanson and Richard Buel Bezanson.15
[S7] New England Historic Genealogical Society, "Massachusetts Vital Records, 1841-1910", Bezanson; Woburn Birth Register; Year: 1888; Volume: 386; Page: 330.
[S1] Dorothy Evans, Bezansons from Nova Scotia, 181, where the birth date is "1888."
[S3] Social Security Administration, Social Security Death Index, OSBORNE BEZANSON, Born=10 Nov 1888, Died=Feb 1961, Issued=022 (Before 1951).
[S8] New England Historic Genealogical Society, "Massachusetts Vital Records, 1911-1915", Osborne Bezanson; Edit Perry Buel; Woburn Marriage Register; Year: 1912; Volume: 611; Page: 813.
[S836] Various Contributors, "Find A Grave", Edit Perry Bezanson, Woodbrook Cemetery, Woburn, Massachusetts; Memorial Number: 157515987.
[S806] Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Public Health, "Massachusetts Death Index, 1901-1980", Edith Bezanson; Year: 1943.
[S19] News article "Osborne Bezanson Marries WAC Lieutenant in Texas", St. Louis Post-Dispatch (St. Louis, Missouri), 28 May 1944, p. 16C.
[S515] East Texas Research Center, "Marguerite Crouse Bezanson, WWII", September 22, 2001.
[S2] Osborne Bezanson Death Notice, Nashua Telegraph (Nashua, New Hampshire), 28 February 1961, p. 2.
[S4] 1900 U.S. Federal Census; Wolburn Ward 6, Middlesex, Massachusetts; Roll: T623 668; Page: 1B; ED: 1007.
[S4] 1910 U.S. Federal Census; Woburn Ward 6, Middlesex, Massachusetts; Roll: T624_607; Page: 19A; ED: 1076; Image: 744.
[S4] 1920 U.S. Federal Census; Woburn Ward 6, Middlesex, Massachusetts; Roll: T625_720; Image: 1071; ED: 545; Page: 3A; Lines: 27-30.
[S4] 1930 U.S. Federal Census; Woburn, Middlesex, Massachusetts; Roll: 931; Page: 8A; ED: 547; Image: 883.0.
[S4] 1940 U.S. Federal Census; Woburn, Middlesex, Massachusetts; Roll: T627_1622; ED: 9-645; Page: 9B; Lines: 63-67.
Clifford E. Bezanson1
M, #20895, b. circa 1900, d. 14 December 1981
Alice Hall b. c 1903, d. 21 Apr 1959
Eva C. Bezanson5 b. c 1923
Paul Kenneth Bezanson+10 b. 25 Jan 1930, d. 15 Apr 1989
Gerald D. Bezanson11 b. 26 Dec 1938, d. 3 Oct 2002
Clifford E. Bezanson was born circa 1900 at Massachusetts.3 He and Stephen Bezanson may have been the same person. Stephen is shown in the 1900 census as a newborn, but there is no Clifford. In the 1910 census, no Stephen is listed and Clifford is shown as 10 years old. Perhaps there was one child and the parents changed their mind about the name?3,4 Clifford E. Bezanson married Alice Hall circa 1921.1,5 Clifford E. Bezanson died on 14 December 1981. He was buried in Woodbrook Cemetery, Woburn, Massachusetts.6
Census 1910 Clifford E. Bezanson appeared on the census of 1910 in the household of Stephen J. Bezanson and Katherine Cumming at 21 Hart Place, Woburn, Middlesex County, Massachusetts.3
Census 1920 Clifford E. Bezanson appeared on the census of 1920 in the household of Stephen J. Bezanson and Katherine Cumming at Lowell Street, Burlington, Massachusetts.7
Census 1930 Clifford E. Bezanson and Alice Hall appeared on the census of 1930 at 22 Ward Street, Woburn, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, with Eva C. Bezanson and Paul Kenneth Bezanson.8
Census 1940 Clifford E. Bezanson and Alice Hall appeared on the census of 1940 at 158 Prospect Avenue, Revere, Massachusetts, with Paul Kenneth Bezanson, Charles Francis Bezanson and Gerald D. Bezanson and also with ten lodgers and Alice Hall's sister Pauline Hall (23.)9
[S4] 1930 U.S. Federal Census; Woburn, Middlesex, Massachusetts; Roll: 931; Image: 1058.0; ED: 552; Page: 13B.
[S836] Various Contributors, "Find A Grave", Clifford Earl Bezanson, Woodbrook Cemetery, Woburn, Massachusetts; Memorial Number: 151207656.
[S4] 1920 U.S. Federal Census; Burlington, Middlesex, Massachusetts; Roll: T625_706; Page: 5A; ED: 22; Image: 917.
[S4] 1930 U.S. Federal Census; Woburn, Middlesex, Massachusetts; FHL Film: 2340666; Roll: 931; Image: 1058.0; ED: 552; Page: 13B; Lines: 51-54.
[S4] 1940 U.S. Federal Census; Revere, Suffolk, Massachusetts; Roll: T627_1644; ED: 13-84; Page: 3A; Lines: 32-46.
Ethel Sophia Bezanson1,2
F, #20896, b. September 1881
Perley Clinton McKeen b. 29 Nov 1879
Norman O. McKeen7 b. c 1911
Relationship 3rd great-granddaughter of Jean George Bezanson
Ethel Sophia Bezanson was born in September 1881 at Massachusetts.3 She married Perley Clinton McKeen on 11 September 1907 at Woburn, Massachusetts. He was 27.1 Ethel Sophia Bezanson and Edith D. Bezanson were sisters. "Ethel S" and "Edith D" are both with their parents in the 1900 census, and "Ethel D" is also with them in 1910. In 1910, however, Ethel has lost 10 years of age and has a new middle initial. I believe that the Ethel in the 1910 census was actually Edith.3,4
Census 1900 Ethel Sophia Bezanson appeared on the census of 1900 in the household of Stephen J. Bezanson and Katherine Cumming at Hart Place, Woburn, Middlesex County, Massachusetts.3
Census 1910 Perley Clinton McKeen and Ethel Sophia Bezanson appeared on the census of 1910 at 55 Mishawum Road, Woburn, Massachusetts, and with Grace McKeen and Leroy McKeen, boarders, who were probably siblings of Perley Clinton McKeen.5
Census 1920 Perley Clinton McKeen and Ethel Sophia Bezanson appeared on the census of 1920 at 784 Main Street, Woburn, Massachusetts, with Norman O. McKeen.6
Census 1930 Perley Clinton McKeen and Ethel Sophia Bezanson appeared on the census of 1930 at 27 Lowell Street, Woburn, Massachusetts, with Norman O. McKeen.7
[S7] New England Historic Genealogical Society, "Massachusetts Vital Records, 1841-1910", Bezanson, Ethel Sophia; McKeen, Perley Clinton; Worburn Marriage Register; Year: 1907; Volume: 571; Page: 805.
[S4] 1910 U.S. Federal Census; Woburn Ward 6, Middlesex, Massachusetts; FHL Film: 1374620; Roll: T624_607; ED: 1076; Page: 4A; Lines: 1-4.
[S4] 1920 U.S. Federal Census; Woburn Ward 6, Middlesex, Massachusetts; Roll: T625_720; Image: 1119; ED: 546; Page: 12A; Lines: 23-25.
[S4] 1930 U.S. Federal Census; Woburn, Middlesex, Massachusetts; FHL Film: 2340666; Roll: 931; Image: 1064.0; ED: 0552; Page: 16B; Lines: 55-57.
[S4] 1940 U.S. Federal Census; Woburn, Middlesex, Massachusetts; Roll: T627_1622; ED: 9-655; Page: 15A; Lines: 30-32.
Dorothy Bezanson1
F, #20897, b. 1891
Benjamin Tower b. 1889, d. 1963
Dorothy Bezanson was born in 1891.1 She married Benjamin Tower.1
Edith Perry Buel1,2
F, #20898, b. 11 December 1887, d. 3 August 1943
Osborne Bezanson b. 10 Nov 1888, d. 27 Feb 1961
Harold Bezanson9 b. 1 Jul 1913, d. 18 Nov 1914
Robert Osborne Bezanson+9 b. 8 Oct 1914, d. 14 Oct 1988
Elizabeth Bezanson9 b. 1917, d. 2 Oct 2006
Dorothea Bezanson+9 b. 26 Feb 1921, d. 3 Jun 2009
Richard Buel Bezanson+9 b. 28 Feb 1924, d. 17 Jan 1997
Edith Perry Buel was born on 11 December 1887 at Woburn, Massachusetts.3,4 She married Osborne Bezanson on 11 September 1912 at Woburn, Massachusetts. She was 24. He was 23.1,2 Edith Perry Buel died on 3 August 1943 at Woburn, Massachusetts, at age 55.5,6 She was buried in Woodbrook Cemetery, Woburn, Massachusetts.5
Census 1920 Osborne Bezanson and Edith Perry Buel appeared on the census of 1920 at 77 Elm Street, Woburn, Massachusetts, with Robert Osborne Bezanson and Elizabeth Bezanson.7
Census 1930 Osborne Bezanson and Edith Perry Buel appeared on the census of 1930 at 628 Main Street, Woburn, Massachusetts, with Robert Osborne Bezanson, Elizabeth Bezanson, Dorothea Bezanson, Richard Buel Bezanson and Donald Bezanson.4
Census 1940 Osborne Bezanson and Edith Perry Buel appeared on the census of 1940 at 628 Main Street, Woburn, Massachusetts, with Elizabeth Bezanson, Dorothea Bezanson and Richard Buel Bezanson.8
[S7] New England Historic Genealogical Society, "Massachusetts Vital Records, 1841-1910", Edith P. Buel; Woburn Birth Register; Year: 1887; Volume: 377; Page: 317.
Marguerite Inez Crouse1,2
F, #20899, b. 14 February 1909, d. 15 September 2004
Marguerite Inez Crouse was born on 14 February 1909 at Marshall, Texas.2 She served in the military in the Women's Auxiliary Corps in World War II.2 She married Osborne Bezanson on 27 May 1944 at Dallas, Texas. She was 35. He was 55.3,1,2 Marguerite Inez Crouse died on 15 September 2004 at Austin, Texas, at age 95.4
Obituary from The Marshall News Messenger (Marshall, Texas), 15 September 2004:
Services for Marguerita Crouse Bezanson of Austin are pending with Sullivan Funeral Home. Ms. Bezanson died Wednesday, Sept. 15, 2004, in Austin.4
From East Texas Research Center of Stephen F. Austin University:
Marguerite Inez Crouse was born February 14, 1909, in Marshall, Texas.
At the outbreak of World War II, she completed officers' candidate school at the Woman's Auxiliary Corps Training Center at Fort Des Moines, Iowa. She was ordered to active duty effective January 23, 1943, as an instructor at WAAC Branch Number 1, Army Administration School at Stephen F. Austin State Teachers College. During her tour of duty at the Nacogdoches school, she also was assigned other duties, including Assistant Personnel Officer, Public Relations Officer, Special Services Officer, and Assistant Adjunct. In January 1944 she was made Adjunct and Commander of Headquarters Company. She eventually obtained the rank of Captain before leaving the service.
In 1944 she married Osborne Bezanson and was living in Tatum, Texas, in 1986.
The collection consists chiefly of special orders relating to the military service and career of Bezanson, most of which were issued at the Nacogdoches Army Administration School.2
[S2] Marguerita Crouse Bezanson Death Notice, Marshall News Messenger (Marshall, Texas), 15 September 2004.
Alice Hall1
F, #20900, b. circa 1903, d. 21 April 1959
Clifford E. Bezanson b. c 1900, d. 14 Dec 1981
Paul Kenneth Bezanson+5 b. 25 Jan 1930, d. 15 Apr 1989
Gerald D. Bezanson6 b. 26 Dec 1938, d. 3 Oct 2002
Alice Hall was born circa 1903 at Massachusetts.2 She married Clifford E. Bezanson circa 1921.1,3 Alice Hall died on 21 April 1959.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line923
|
__label__wiki
| 0.915836
| 0.915836
|
Flashing Lights Legalised As New Cyclists’ Code Planned
BicycleLaw December 29, 2009 May 8th, 2016
The Irish Times: Flashing lights legalised as new cyclists’ code planned
OLIVIA KELLY
FLASHING BICYCLE lights, which have been used illegally for years by many cyclists, have been legalised by Minister for Transport Noel Dempsey.
The use of flashing rather than static lights on the front or rear of bicycles has become increasing popular with cyclists seeking to make themselves more visible to motorists.
However, their use was illegal until just days before Christmas when Mr Dempsey amended the road traffic regulations to allow their use. A spokesman for Mr Dempsey said the amendment regularises a situation where cyclists, mostly unwittingly, were breaking the law.
“This is something the department has been working on for a long time. Most people using the lights, which are widely available, never would have realised that they weren’t legal.”
The change to the law is the first of several amendments Mr Dempsey is planning to make to the rules of the road for cyclists.
The Department of Transport is drafting regulations to end the compulsory use of cycle lanes where they exist. The current rules put cyclists in a position of breaking the law if they have to leave cycle lanes because of obstructions such as parked cars.
They also force cyclists to remain in cycle lanes where the surface may be unsuitable or where the lane makes it difficult to safely continue in a straight line, or makes it impossible to make a right-hand turn.
Mr Dempsey also plans to legalise the practice where cyclists overtake slow-moving traffic on the inside, when it is safe to do so.
“The National Cycle Policy Framework, that I announced in April, made commitments to address legal issues that affect cyclists. The framework also made commitments to provide more education to cyclists and others in relation to road behaviour. I’m pleased to now deliver on these commitments,” he said.
A new safety leaflet is being issued to bus and lorry drivers to assist them in ensuring cyclists’ safety. It will also be available at www.smartertravel.ie.
Dublinbikes: 23,000 subscribers
Almost 23,000 subscribers have joined Dublin City Council’s dublinbikes rental scheme, and more than 200,000 trips have been taken on the bikes since their introduction last September.
The scheme, which provides 450 bicycles for rent at 40 stations between Dublin’s Royal and Grand canals, has had the highest take-up of any city bike scheme to date in Europe, city manager John Tierney said.
“The bike scheme has surpassed all expectations in terms of subscribers and popularity,” he said.
The most recent figures, compiled by the council on December 9th last, show 22,762 subscribers have signed up to use the bikes. The majority, 15,928, are long-term users who pay a €10 annual subscription fee, while 6,834 have bought three-day tickets at a cost of €2.
The council is finalising plans to expand the scheme with JC Decaux – the outdoor advertising company which won the contract to provide the scheme in return for advertising space in the city.
2009 News No Comments
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line925
|
__label__cc
| 0.608752
| 0.391248
|
BillerudKorsnäs has completed the acquisition
31 May 2019, 11:00 CET
BillerudKorsnäs has completed the acquisition of Bergvik Skog Öst
As previously communicated, BillerudKorsnäs has entered into an agreement with all shareholders of Bergvik Skog AB concerning a split of Bergvik Skog AB’s forest assets. The agreement implies that BillerudKorsnäs acquires Bergvik Skog Öst AB, which comprises approximately 350,000 hectares of forest land in Sweden, and in connection to that divests 5 per cent of the shares in Bergvik Skog Väst AB to Stora Enso.
All conditions for the transactions have now been fulfilled and the transactions have been completed today the 31 May.
The purchase price for Bergvik Skog Öst AB amounts to approximately SEK 6.4 billion on a debt free basis and after reduction of deferred tax, corresponding to approximately SEK 18,000 per hectar of forestland. The net cash effect after the acquisition of Bergvik Skog Öst AB and the transfer of 5 per cent of the shares in Bergvik Skog Väst AB, amounts to SEK 5.4 billion, which is entirely financed by bank loans.
“The repurchase of Bergvik Skog Öst is part of our strategy to ensure a long-term competitive and stable wood supply. Going forward our intent is to find suitable investors to this forest land and thereby ensure long-term wood agreements, rather than tying our capital into forest assets. The process to find suitable investors is ongoing,” says Petra Einarsson, CEO and President at BillerudKorsnäs.
Bergvik Skog Öst will be consolidated into BillerudKorsnäs’ accounts as of 31 May 2019 and is expected to have a marginal impact on earnings.
Christopher Casselblad, EVP Communication & Sustainability, +46 (0) 8 553 335 08
Lena Schattauer, Head of Investor Relations, +46 8 553 335 10
This information constituted inside information prior to publication. This is information that BillerudKorsnäs AB (publ) is obliged to make public pursuant to the EU Market Abuse Regulation. The information was submitted for publication, through the agency of the contact persons set out above, at 11.00 CET on 31 May 2019.
BillerudKorsnäs provides packaging materials and solutions that challenge conventional packaging for a sustainable future. We are a world leading provider of primary fiber based packaging materials and have customers in over 100 countries. The company has 8 production units in Sweden, Finland and the UK and about 4,500 employees in over 13 countries. BillerudKorsnäs has an annual turnover of about SEK 24 billion and is listed on Nasdaq Stockholm. www.billerudkorsnas.com
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line926
|
__label__wiki
| 0.732655
| 0.732655
|
Magazine and AR-15 Bans Upheld by 2nd Circuit
by Jesse Perez November 06, 2015
We wish we had better news for our Law Shield members regarding the Oct. 19 decision by the U.S. District Court for the Second Circuit in New York State Rifle and Pistol Assoc., Inc., v. Cuomo.
Unfortunately, that case largely upheld Connecticut and New York laws passed in the wake of the Sandy Hook tragedy. The laws banned modern semi-auto rifles, including the AR-15, and magazines for any firearm with a capacity of greater than 10 rounds.
Although AR-15s and other semi-automatic rifles have been America’s best-selling types for several years, including for home defense, the Second Circuit nevertheless found they could be completely banned, disregarding the analytical framework set up in Heller and McDonald v. Chicago.
The Second Circuit basically ignored the prevalence of a certain firearm mechanism as important: “This much is clear: Americans own millions of the firearms that the challenged legislation prohibits.” It also acknowledged, “The same is true of large‐capacity magazines, as defined by the New York and Connecticut statutes.”
It then considered whether these implements could be characterized as “dangerous and unusual” in the hands of law‐abiding civilians” and found that the evidence on this point was inconclusive.
Still, the Court assumed “for the sake of argument that these ‘commonly used’ weapons and magazines are also ‘typically possessed by law‐abiding citizens for lawful purposes’” and that the laws therefore “ban weapons protected by the Second Amendment.”
The Second Circuit then admitted, “The laws at issue are both broad and burdensome” and create “a ‘serious encroachment’ on the Second Amendment right.” However, the court refused to apply “strict scrutiny,” the most stringent form of Constitutional analysis, and instead applied “intermediate scrutiny,” a standard that has led other courts to uphold nearly every gun control law that has come before them.
Arguments and evidence produced by the plaintiffs were dismissed by the Court as “not strong enough to overcome the ‘substantial deference’ we owe to ‘predictive judgments of the legislature’ on matters of public safety.”
“The same logic applies a fortiori to the restrictions on large capacity magazines,” the Court said. (The phrase a fortiori broadly means “all the more so.”) That means, basically, that “large capacity” magazines are more subject to misuse in crime and therefore receive less constitutional protection.
This creates a bizarre outcome: something that enhances the utility or effectiveness of a firearm otherwise protected by the Second Amendment makes that firearm more vulnerable to prohibition.
Two minor pluses in the decision were that the Second Circuit invalidated a provision of New York’s misnamed SAFE Act that imposed a seven-round load limit on firearms used for self-defense, even though magazines of up to 10 rounds remain legal.
It also held that Connecticut could not ban a pump-action Remington 7615 firearm identified by name under its “assault weapon” law because the State failed to present any evidence about its “dangerous” and “unusual” character. It noted, however, that if such evidence were produced, a future such ban might survive.
The post Magazine and AR-15 Bans Upheld by 2nd Circuit appeared first on U.S. & Texas LawShield.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line930
|
__label__wiki
| 0.791595
| 0.791595
|
BUSHRA ALI SOLICITORS are very experienced in representing persons in Judicial Review Applications. Were a decision-making body issues a decision against which there is no domestic remedy available such as an in-country right to appeal to the First – Tier Tribunal, you may seek to challenge that decision as irrational, unlawful or perverse. As BUSHRA ALI SOLICITORS are renowned for resolving the most complex of cases, we have a particular expertise in finding errors or flaws in Home Office decisions, particularly where no right to appeal is granted, and pursuing Judicial Review challenges before the Upper Tribunal and High Courts. In most circumstances applications for Judicial Review are now lodged with the Upper Tribunal. A fee needs to be paid to the courts. You may be able to seek a fee exemption where for example you are receiving NASS support or section 4 support, or are in receipt of qualifying benefits. We will draft extensive statement of facts and grounds and prepare your Judicial Review bundle and application to be placed before the Upper Tribunal. Once Judicial Review Proceedings have been lodged, we will await the sealed copy of the Claim Form to be returned to us by the Upper Tribunal. We will then proceed with filing and serving a copy of the sealed Claim Form, Judicial Review grounds and bundle with the Government Legal Department, representing that Home Office. The Home Office will then proceed with being advised by the Government Legal Department and if intending to defend their refusal decision will proceed with filing and serving an acknowledgement of service and summary grounds of defence with the Upper Tribunal. Thereafter the Upper Tribunal will proceed with considering the Judicial Review Application on the papers without a hearing and will issue a decision as to whether or not permission for Judicial Review is to be granted. In order to be granted permission for Judicial Review one must demonstrate that the decision they are challenging may be irrational, unlawful or perverse. In the event that permission for Judicial Review is granted, a fee will need to be paid to the Upper Tribunal in order to continue Judicial Review Proceedings. Again, one may seek a fee exemption if one qualifies. Thereafter, it is usual for the Government Legal Department to proceed with advising Home Office once again, and the Home Office may consider offering to reconsider your application and perhaps invite you to agree to withdraw Judicial Review Proceedings by consent. Usually, this would be the most amicable solution as the best outcome of Judicial Review Proceedings is to have an order from the Judge compelling the Home Office or decision-making body to reconsider your matter. Should the Home Office not make any such offer, the matter will usually proceed to a full Judicial Review Hearing. At the end of the Judicial Review Hearing the judge would be making a decision as to whether you are to succeed in your Judicial Review Application, or not. In the event you are to succeed, the judge may make a decision quashing the decision-making bodies’ decision and compelling that decision-making body to reconsider your matter. If however on the papers permission for Judicial Review was not granted, you may make an application seeking an oral renewal of Judicial Review. Again, there would be a fee payable to the court for this and you would be able to seek a fee exemption, supposing that you qualify. You would then be waiting for a hearing date and we would represent you before the Tribunal in order to try to convince the judge, orally that permission for Judicial Review should be granted. Again, in order to succeed we will need to demonstrate that the Home Office or decision-making body decision could be unlawful, irrational, and perverse. In the event you were successful at an oral renewal hearing, again, before the matter proceeds to a full Judicial Review Hearing, the Home Office would normally seek advice from the Government Legal Department as to whether they can continue to defend their decision. There is a chance that at this stage the Home Office may agree to offer to reconsider your matter and terms of consent could be agreed to withdraw Judicial Review Proceedings.
As stated above we at BUSHRA ALI SOLICITORS are highly experienced in dealing with all types of Judicial Review matters. Ms Bushra Ali herself has dealt with a countless number of very complicated Judicial Review matters. She has dealt with complex matters both inside and outside of the Immigration Rules. She has challenged Home Office decisions refusing to accept Further Submissions as amounting to a Fresh Claim. She has a very high record of ensuring that persons are not removed from the UK. Where persons have had removal directions set and have been about to be removed from the UK, she has successfully managed to obtain last minute interim relief, ensuring she has an out of office hours judge issue an injunction prohibiting the UK Home Office from removing her client from outside the jurisdiction of England and Wales. This firm does not hold a Legal Aid contract and thus we assist on a private paying basis only. Should you have a situation whereby you wish to challenge a Home Office or other decision-making body decision by way of Judicial Review Proceedings, please do not hesitate to contact us.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line931
|
__label__cc
| 0.573668
| 0.426332
|
Swakopmund is Namibia’s holiday destination for tourists and locals alike. It makes for a great ecape of the heat further inland, and is Namibia's adventure capital.
The city itself resembles a small German town with lots of cafés and restaurants, art galleries and museums. While there’s plenty to do in Swakopmund itself, the real action happens in the desert surrounding Swakopmund. Quad-biking, sand-boarding, sand-skiing, parasailing and dozens of other guided adrenaline activities are available. A very worthwile and rewarding excursion is a "Tommy's living desert tours". With a guide you look for all kinds of life in the seemingly dry and dead desert.
Walvis Bay is Namibia’s major harbor town, but it is quickly developing into a popular holiday destination. The main attraction is the lagoon in the middle of town. It is home to thousands of pink flamingoes, rare white pelicans and many other wetland bird species. It is the only "Ramsar site" in Namibia.
Dolphin cruises and kayak tours are available in the Lagoon, where seals sometime come right up to the boats. A climb up to Dune 7 is rewarded with stunning panoramic views of Walvis Bay to the West and vast empty plains to the East.
At "the Raft" restaurant, built on stilts in the middle of the lagoon, you can spend a relaxing evening over a bottle of wine and enjoy a wonderful sunset.
Lüderitz
Lüderitz is a harbour town in the south of the country. It is known for its colonial architecture and for the wildlife, including seals, penguins, flamingoes, ostriches and brown hyena's. The bay where it is situated was discovered by Bartholomeus Diaz in 1478, he called it Angra Pequena and he erected a stone cross. The town was later bought by Hanseat Adolf Lüderitz from the Local Nama chief. When Lüderitz did not return from an expedition to the Orange River the town was named after him: Lüderitzbucht. Dutch adventurers were not very succesfull in finding minerals here, but later expeditions discovered a vast marine wildlife. Luderitz began as a trading post with many profitable entreprises like, seal hunting, fishing, whaling and guano harvesting. In 1909, after the discovery of diamonds the town prosperred.
Nowadays, tourist can enjoy the Waterfront with its yachtclub, boattrips to seal and penguin islands, excursions in to the restricted areas and the Bogenfels (rock arch), and 4x4 tours to hidden bays north of town. Fresh crayfish and oysters are abundant in seaon and a culinary Delight.
Kolmanskuppe
During the Diamond rush at the beginning of the 20th century, Kolmanskuppe was built and became a very lively and prosperous town in the harsh desert climate. All that is left today are the diamand restricted area, where mining still continues and the ghost town of Kolmanskuppe. You can enjoy a guided tour through the once flourishing town, including the old ice factory, the butchery and the gymnastics hall. You'll see rusty water pipes and railway tracks dissapear in the sand, which has filled some of the rooms up to the ceiling. Holes in walls and roofs let the sun paint bizarre pictures of light.
Back to all areas
Mountainous Central
Green Kalahari
Lush North East
Remote North West
The whole coast of Namibia used to be called the Skeleton Coast. These days it is only the Northern 500km from the Kunene River to the Ugab River, that is called the Skeleton Coast National Park. It derives its name from the many whale and seal bones that lined the coastline, from the times of the whaling industry. Nowadays it is the skeletal remains of many shipwrecks that line the coast. Some of them totally disintegrated, others still in quite good condition. The northern part of the park is declared a wilderness area and not open to the public. The rest is a recreational area, excellent for fishing. The best way to see the Skeleton Coast is from on a scenic flight from Swakopmund.
Henties Bay is a small settlement 70km north of Swakopmund. You pass it on the way to the Cape Cross Seal Colony, which is another 55 km further north. The town is mainly visited by recreational anglers and 4x4 enthusiast and is a popular holiday destination for South Africans and Namibians.
You might hear them before you see them – the bleats and barks of 200,000 Cape fur seals, the largest breeding colony in the world and one of many on the Skeleton Coast. From November to December massive bulls fight for beach territory and the right to mate. Females breed in synchrony, and spend their days fishing in the Benquela Current returning to the shore amongst thousands of pups. Located about 125 km from Swakopmund, visitors can walk along the edge of the colony and learn about these interesting animals and the unique history of Cape Cross.
The Atlantic Coast
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line932
|
__label__wiki
| 0.76274
| 0.76274
|
Public Enemy part ways with Flavor Flav, played Bernie Sanders rally (watch)
Andrew Sacher
UPDATE: Flavor Flav blasts Chuck D for kicking him out of Public Enemy over politics.
UPDATE 2: Public Enemy say they "did not part ways with Flavor Flav over his political views."
Public Enemy were billed to perform at a Bernie Sanders rally in LA on Sunday (3/1), but the announcement was a little confusing at first, as the event flyer said "Public Enemy" but the RSVP page said "Public Enemy Radio," an offshoot version of the group with Chuck D but no Flavor Flav. Before the event, Flavor Flav sent Bernie Sanders a cease and desist, writing "While Chuck is certainly free to express his political views as he sees fit—his voice alone does not speak for Public Enemy. The planned performance will only be Chuck D of Public Enemy, it will not be a performance by Public Enemy. Those who truly know what Public Enemy stands for know what time it is, there is no Public Enemy without Flavor Flav."
Chuck D then gave a statement to HipHopDX, saying, "Flavor chooses to dance for his money and not do benevolent work like this. He has a year to get his act together and get himself straight or he’s out." Chuck D's attorney also said, "From a legal standpoint, Chuck could perform as Public Enemy if he ever wanted to; he is the sole owner of the Public Enemy trademark. He originally drew the logo himself in the mid-80’s, is also the creative visionary and the group’s primary songwriter, having written Flavor’s most memorable lines."
Apparently Flavor Flav had less than a year, as Public Enemy has now issued a statement to Pitchfork, saying that Flavor Flav is officially no longer a member of Public Enemy after 37 years. "Public Enemy and Public Enemy Radio will be moving forward without Flavor Flav. We thank him for his years of service and wish him well," the statement reads.
Meanwhile, Public Enemy Radio -- whose lineup is Chuck D, DJ Lord, Jahi, and the S1Ws -- played the Bernie Sanders rally as planned. The full event (which also featured Sarah Silverman and Dick Van Dyke) streamed live, and you can watch an archive of the stream HERE. Public Enemy Radio come on around the 39 minute mark.
Filed Under: Bernie Sanders, Chuck D, Flavor Flav, Public Enemy
Categories: Hip Hop news, Music News
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line937
|
__label__wiki
| 0.975605
| 0.975605
|
Kingg Bucc Teases Forthcoming Project With a New Single, “Turn Me Up”
Latin Music Ruled the Charts in 2020 — and Miami Played a Major Role
Bret Michaels on the Foo Fighters, Being the Susan Lucci of Rock and Roll, and Drealism
Liz Tracy
Liz Tracy | February 16, 2012 | 5:50pm
"I'm a self-proclaimed drealist. I may have invented this word, I'm not
sure," says Bret Michaels, "But I'm a dreamer and a realist. I'm the kind of guy that I dream
stuff up big and then I try to go for it."
Though many artists do too much dreaming and other people too much pragmatic thinking, Michael notes, "I dream stuff up big and then I try to go for it." Given his recent laundry list of endeavors, he's definitely gone for it, and all the way.
We've seen a lot of former Poison frontman Bret Michaels over the past few years. With his show Rock of Love, we uncovered a personal side to the rock star, both good and not so good, depending on who's in the room.
Around the time he suffered a horrifying brain hemorrhage in 2010 that
almost killed him, the rock star, it seems, turned away from the
silicone honeys and toward the hearth-light of home. Besides settling
down and focusing more on his two daughters, Michaels is intent upon
building what appears to be an empire.
A list of his newest projects include: a new line of digital
greeting cards, a line for Pet Smart and one with Dean Guitars, a
partnership with Reader's Digest, and even the creation of a Snapple drink called
Trop-a-Rocka tea. That last one is very neat.
The digital
greeting cards are a video message one person buys for another that
includes a personalized greeting from Michaels. "We just started what's
called DIG, Digital Instant Gratification. It's sort of the Polaroid of
the new millennium." Many are dedicated to those in the troops serving overseas.
them is something close to Michaels' heart, though he says, "In
no way, shape or form am I going out promoting a warmonger; that's
not my thing." Rather, he notes, "I'm just extremely grateful to our
troops and the
sacrifices they make." His entire family has served at some point or
another, including his father and cousin Bobby who goes on the road with
him and has two Purple Hearts from Vietnam.
Michaels' greatest challenges has been that he's been diabetic since the
age of six. "I still do four shots a day and right now I'm up to about
ten blood tests a day. Forty-two years of my life I've spent
taking injections of some sort."
He started the Bret Michaels Life Rocks
Foundation, gives to other charities dedicated to the chronic illness,
and also spends his own money to send kids to camp. "Young kids get
diagnosed and they think their life is over. They read all of these
horrific things that can happen. I said it's the opposite. Sometimes
it's unfortunate, but that's the hand you're dealt. You have to learn to
adapt and make it great. I try to teach them the great quality of life
they can have being a diabetic." He added thoughtfully, "What isn't a challenge? Half
of the battle is mind over matter."
months ago, Bret performed with Poison who opened for Motley Crue. He's now
touring solo. He enjoys both playing with the band and alone. "I love
them both." he assured. "I am extremely
thankful. We all grew up as friends. We've had a long and great career
together." Even through ups and downs, "We all respect each other and
have a great time."
When he tours alone, he doesn't leave out
the Poison hits, but he offers his own twist to each. He intersperses
the older songs with classic rock covers and solo work. The crowds are
multi-generational and he calls the shows "a party."
A Big Foo
Fighters fan, he really related to Dave Grohl's Grammy speech. Of his
and Grohl's style, he says "I don't want to say old school, I'll say real
school." During shows, he pointed out, "I still go on a stage, I have no
in-ears, I still use the monitors. I've
got no click track, no Pro Tools. There's nothing going on but our band
playing. It's truly a raw experience."
Creating music on the
spot makes it special. "It's always a different show. Anything can
happen, and I think that's what makes rock and roll fly by the seat of
your pants." But he doesn't judge other artists who use the help of
technology. "I realize that a lot of pop art is more about the visual
the music. And it's not a disrespect, but a lot of their show is
pre-programmed, and I get it because they're doing dance moves. A lot of
audiences love that." But when it comes to rock and roll and country, he firmly believes it should be kept real.
Michaels headlined the The Grammy Foundation's
live music kick-off party. Even though he hasn't snagged a Grammy yet,
"Eventually, it's coming," he joked, "I'm the Susan Lucci of rock and
roll."
That's not all Michaels has been up to. He's got a line
with Pet Smart called the Pets Rock collection. They approached him
about the project. "They know I love pets, they're
based out of Scottsdale, Arizona where I'm from." Apparently, it's a
huge success. Michaels is a big animal lover. His first pet was a
shepherd he named Parcus Aurilicus. "I've got like a
zillion Polaroid pictures of me in the worst bell bottom pants ever,
hugging my big German shepherd dog." Since then, he moved on to a guinea
pig, a garden snake, and now
he owns horses and other dogs, "You name it, I've got it."
very appreciative of those who have supported him along the way. When
breaking out to do solo work, he found a partner in the Hard Rock casinos.
"Much love and respect to the Seminole Indian tribe, who's taken a lot
of chances on me, and we've had much success over the years at the Hard
Rock venues," he says.
It's also Michaels who takes a lot of chances,
and drealist that he is, he's made life a busy and rewarding one for himself and many others.
Catch Bret Michaels at Hard Rock Live (One Seminole Way, Hollywood) on Saturday, February 18. For tickets visit hardrocklivehollywoodfl.com.
New Times on Facebook | County Grind on Facebook | Twitter | e-mail us |
Liz has her master’s degree in religion from Florida State University. She has since written for publications and outlets such as Miami New Times, Rolling Stone, Pitchfork, Ocean Drive, the Huffington Post, NBC Miami, Time Out Miami, Insomniac, the Daily Dot, and the Atlantic. Liz spent three years as New Times Broward-Palm Beach’s music editor, was the weekend news editor at Inverse, and is currently the managing editor at Tom Tom Magazine.
Twitter: @theliz4eva
Your Guide to Record Store Day 2020 in Miami and Fort Lauderdale
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line938
|
__label__wiki
| 0.730358
| 0.730358
|
ArtistsExhibitionsPublic ExhibitionsViewing RoomArt FairsNewsPublicationsAbout
November 18, 2011 – January 7, 2012
Installation Views Press Release Artists Press Back
Bruce Silverstein is pleased to present Book by Book, the gallery’s first solo exhibition by the artist Keith Smith. Smith has been creating books as works of art since the 1960s, yet he has rarely shown his work to the public over the past twenty-five years.
The 30 books selected for this exhibition, made between 1967-2011, reveal Smith's unfailing interest in experimenting with new materials and processes. He designs books that allow the viewer to experience and question the structure and nature of the book itself—his works are often radical departures from traditional books—made of string or covered in fabric, they unfold, light-up, do not open, are unbound, or punched full of holes. Each piece is an opportunity for the viewer to expand his or her own expectations for a book and physically engage with the imagery or text.
For Smith, his work is a form of creative articulation whereby the act of making the book—the binding, printing method, page materials and textures that comprise the form, content and structure of the book are chosen to most adequately express the artist’s original inspiration or personal challenge.
While a single book might be guided by one idea or one particular interest, when the viewer examines the artist’s complete body of work—currently over 280 books—images of certain people and places reappear, and Smith’s voice begins to emerge. His works address the recurring themes of love and desire and reveal the artist’s efforts to reckon with his sexual identity.
Keith was educated at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, and the Institute of Design at the Illinois Institute of Technology. He has taught at the Visual Studies Workshop, the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, and the University of Illinois. He is a recipient of two Guggenheim Fellowships, and a National Endowment of the Arts grant and a Pollock/Krasner Foundation grant.
His work is in the collections of the Art Institute of Chicago; Center of Creative Photography, University of Arizona; Fogg Art Museum, Harvard University; International Museum of Photography at the George Eastman House; Museum of Fine Arts, Houston; Museum of Modern Art, New York; The Getty Museum, Los Angeles; and the Victoria and Albert Museum, London among others.
He has authored nine books on bookmaking, among them; 200 Books, An Annotated Bibliography, published by Keith Smith BOOKS, First Edition, May 2000; Books without Paste or Glue, Non-Adhesive Binding Volume I, The Sigma Foundation, Inc., 1991; and Structure of the Visual Book, First Edition, The Sigma Foundation, 1984
212-627-3930 Telephone
inquiries@brucesilverstein.com
The gallery is currently open by appointment. To make one, please call 212-627-3930 or write to inquiries@brucesilverstein.com.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line939
|
__label__wiki
| 0.979799
| 0.979799
|
Nova Scotia gunman escaped by driving through field after first killings: RCMP
HALIFAX — As police closed in on a killer who had already murdered more than a dozen people in a rural corner of Nova Scotia, the suspect narrowly escaped by driving a replica police car through a field under cover of darkness, the RCMP revealed Tuesday.
RCMP Supt. Darren Campbell said the first 911 call on April 18 came from the village of Portapique just after 10 p.m. and officers arrived at the scene on Portapique Beach Road at 10:26 p.m.
The road provides the only access to the main highway, which is why police believed they had the assailant cornered.
However, Campbell confirmed Tuesday that police have since learned a resident spotted the gunman fleeing the area only nine minutes later.
“There was a witness that saw a vehicle that was travelling through a field, which was not very common,” Campbell told a news conference at RCMP headquarters in Halifax.
Though police had provided a detailed timeline last Friday, the timing of the 911 call, the quick escape and several other key details of what happened later that night were not disclosed.
Gabriel Wortman, who killed 22 people over a span of about 13 hours, drove east from Portapique to Debert, N.S., where he arrived at 11:12 p.m. and spent the night in an industrial park, Campbell said.
As for the replica police car, which the gunman used to escape and later surprise victims, it was obtained in the fall of 2019, and was one of four former police vehicles he bought at auctions in the last few years.
Campbell said the 51-year-old Halifax-based denturist outfitted the vehicle with an emergency light bar and decals that made the late-model Ford Taurus look almost identical to a genuine RCMP vehicle.
“The gunman was a collector of many things, including police memorabilia,” Campbell told reporters. “He was in possession of multiple pieces of police uniforms from a variety of agencies …. How he obtained the decals and how they were produced is an investigative detail that I can’t get into.”
Campbell said many witnesses have come forward to confirm the killer had a keen interest in the RCMP.
Used RCMP uniforms can be purchased from surplus stores, auctions and through online vendors, but Campbell said it was unclear how the suspect obtained the uniform in question.
“He didn’t hide that fact — that he had cars or memorabilia — from people that knew him,” he said. However, the senior Mountie said police were not aware of these collections.
The gunman was wearing an authentic RCMP shirt and yellow-striped pants during the initial stage of his 90-kilometre rampage, said Campbell, the officer in charge of support services for Nova Scotia.
He confirmed that police had interviewed retired RCMP officers who were related to Wortman, but Campbell said there was no indication they offered any help to the shooter.
As for the weapons used, police had earlier confirmed the suspect had pistols and long-barrelled weapons. But Campbell went further on Tuesday, saying the shooter had several semi-automatic handguns and two semi-automatic rifles.
Some of the weapons came from the United States, but he didn’t specify which ones.
Investigators have yet to speculate about a motive, though they have confirmed the killings started after the suspect assaulted his common-law partner in Portapique, which is home to about 100 people.
The woman survived by fleeing her home and hiding in the nearby woods, but 13 others died in the neighbourhood.
On Friday, Campbell said the assault may have been a “catalyst” to the murders that followed. But on Tuesday, he stressed that no one should be left with the impression that the woman “had anything to do with the gunman continuing on with his rampage.”
“The word catalyst was used to express that that was the first victim in a series of very horrific events,” Campbell said.
“I want to be very clear that violence against women is intolerable. It’s real. It exists. I don’t want to be misunderstood, that the victim had any blame in relation to what occurred on those awful days.”
Campbell said he was not aware of any evidence to suggest the gunman was targeting women.
“It appeared as if he was just targeting individuals that either he knew or individuals (at random) for whatever reason.”
Police have identified 435 witness and have already interviewed half of them. As well, investigators have processed 20 legal applications, many of them for search warrants.
The Mounties said the remains of eight victims have been recovered from burned structures and vehicles, though the causes of death have yet to be determined.
– By Michael MacDonald and Michael Tutton
This report by The Canadian Press was first published April 28, 2020.
News from © Canadian Press Enterprises Inc., 2020
Saskatchewan RCMP shoot and kill man in North Battleford
First RCMP dogs to detect human remains finish training
RCMP Staff Sgt. Vishal Mathura promoted in B.C.
B.C. RCMP’s longest-serving instructor of the Drug Abuse Resistance Education program honoured
Nova Scotia shooting
RCMP to boost social media mining for threats ranging from disease to shootings
N.S. sets up help lines for citizens struggling amid mass shooting, pandemic
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line940
|
__label__cc
| 0.572816
| 0.427184
|
Frances Doughty Mystery Books In Order
Publication Order of Frances Doughty Books
The Poisonous Seed (2011) Hardcover Paperback Kindle
The Daughters of Gentlemen (2012) Hardcover Paperback Kindle
A Case of Doubtful Death (2013) Hardcover Paperback Kindle
An Appetite for Murder (2014) Hardcover Paperback Kindle
The Children of Silence (2015) Hardcover Paperback Kindle
Death in Bayswater (2016) Hardcover Paperback Kindle
A True and Faithful Brother (2017) Hardcover Paperback Kindle
Murder at the Bayswater Bicycle Club (2018) Hardcover Paperback Kindle
Frances Doughty series is a historical fiction series by Linda Stratmann. The series centers on Frances Doughty, a young girl who is determined to excel in whatever she undertakes. Despite her wit and determination, Frances encounters a lot of challenges when she is trying to unravel the mysteries that fall on her laps. This series comes with mystery stories set in the Victorian era. The author is also keen to show just how far women have come to become respectable members of society, whether single or married.
The Poisonous Seed
The Poisonous seed is the first book in the poisonous seed series. The story features Frances Doughty, a young, ambitious girl with big dreams and a fantastic personality. France’s is every parent’s dream as far as a daughter is concerned. She not only helps her father at the shop, but Frances has taken over the household, and she does a great job of keeping everything in check. While she currently works at the father’s chemist, Frances dreams of becoming a pharmacist one day.
The story begins with the death of Pervia Garton, a local businessman. William Doughty, Frances’s father and owner of the local chemist, gets the blame for the businessman’s death. This is because just before Pervia died, he had taken medicine administered William’s chemist. These claims are not unfounded as strychnine is found in the medication that Pervia took. While all evidence point to William’s prescription as the cause of death, Frances is convinced that the father had nothing to do with the rich man’s death.
Frances was there when the medicine was administered, and is determined to prove that her father is innocent. Despite her lack of enough evidence to convince the police, Frances sets on a quest to find the truth. With determination, courage, and wits, Frances discovers more that she is looking for. Aside from the nasty rumor, the Doughty family is going through a lot. Frances’s brother has just died, and the family is still mourning the loss. William is obviously at his lowest, and Frances gets the feeling that if the father loses his chemist, then the old man will be inconsolable. Her reason for going for the truth is to redeem her father’s reputation
Prepare to experience more deaths and discover deep secrets that could shake the Doughty family. Even before the killer is unmasked, the things Frances uncover have the potential to change her life completely. Frances is a go-getter, and despite the many challenges she encounters along the way, she is still determined to dig deeper. Frances is not working alone. She has a few friends in law enforcement who help her throughout her investigative journey.
This is an exciting detective story that comes without gore and blood. It feels good to interact with an ambitious star who does not let her circumstances limit her. Without any experience in detective training, this star goes to uncover a murder that has remained unresolved for years. If you are looking for an engaging investigative piece with a fast pace and an exciting cast, The Poisonous seed is ideal.
The Daughters of Gentlemen
The Daughters of Gentlemen is the second book in the Frances Doughty series. This story starts right, where the second one ended. At the end of the first book, it is clear that Frances will have to find another lifeline and possibly go live with her uncle. This means that her maid Sarah will also be without a job. In a strange twist of fate, Frances is hired as a private investigator, and she engages Sarah as her assistant.
Here, we get to see Frances Doughty doing her first professional case. Even though she comes without any formal training, the way she handled the case involving her father earns her respect in her community. Frances is trying to find the people responsible for distributing pamphlets in Bayswater Academy for Young Ladies. The feminist leaflets are urging women not to marry. Is this a malicious joke, or is there more to these pamphlets?
The innocent pamphlets case grows into a full-blown murder case when someone who worked at the school is found dead. Thanks to the election fever and the actions of the Bayswater Women’s Suffrage Society, more lies and murders are exposed. As Frances digs deeper into the case, she discovers that the dwellers of Bayswater have a lot of skeletons in their closets.
Other things are happening in the background that makes the book even more enjoyable. The book also touches on some critical aspects of history, such as the Women’s suffrage society. It is exciting to see how Frances makes a new powerful friend. Sarah turns out to be quite resourceful and a perfect partner for Frances. Frances is a likable character. The young girl is not only bright but also diligent. It is remarkable how she leaves no stones unturned despite the bigotry and prejudice she faces as a young unmarried woman. She is also charming enough to convince people to share with her their deepest secrets.
From her writing, it is clear that the author has a deep understanding of Victorian London. The narrative flows well and is beautifully written. The pace is relentless from start to finish, and the characters here, just like in the first book is quite impressive. Some of the characters in the Poisonous Seed make an appearance in this second piece as new ones are introduced.
If you are looking for a page-turning mystery story with historically accurate details and a Victorian feel, The Daughters of Gentlemen book is ideal. Join young Frances on her journey as a private investigator with more on her plate than she can handle. Some people are going to die, and thanks to Frances digging, a lot of secrets will be discovered. Will Frances be able to solve this mystery and escape unhurt? What will be the reaction when hidden secrets are brought to light? Read about all this and so much more in this beautifully told story.
Book Series In Order » Characters » Frances Doughty Mystery
There was a strong possibility that we would never have got a classic book such as The Da Vinci Code. Author Dan Brown was a pop musician initially, and even relocated to Hollywood in an attempt to continue that career. However his kids version of electronic music never caught on, and he ended up becoming an author.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line943
|
__label__wiki
| 0.666785
| 0.666785
|
Vendor from Lincoln County
KELLIE BIGOS, News Contributor
Sun, 01/27/2019 - 8:00am
Shannon’s Unshelled. Courtesy of Dmitry Pepper
Shannon on deck. Courtesy of Ross Griffin
Shannon Schmelzer had always wanted to be her own boss, running her own business, she said in an interview before launching Shannon's Unshelled in spring 2014, as a seasonal lobster roll and hot dog stand by the Footbridge Parking Lot in Boothbay Harbor. Little did Schmelzer know, the day would come when she would be chosen as a vendor from Lincoln County to provide refreshments at a governor's inaugural celebration!
Incoming governor Janet Mills chose to feature Maine musicians for entertainment and food and beverages from each of the 16 counties during her festive inaugural celebration at the Augusta Civic Center Jan. 4.
Out of the blue, Schmelzer got a call to ask if she would like to be one of the vendors. Schmelzer did not hesitate. "It was a privilege to contribute to such a prestigious event."
The vendors were divided between the main auditorium and The State of Maine Showcase Lounge in the North Wing at the Civic Center. Schmelzer's hors d'oeuvres were offered at the smoked seafood bar in the main auditorium. According to Schmelzer, constructing enough lobster bites to serve potentially 4,000 people would have been daunting without the help of the food and beverage manager and gourmet chefs at the Civic Center.
When she saw the list of scheduled vendors broken down by county, she realized she was the only one from Lincoln County. "As a small town girl who started a business from the grassroots up less than five years ago, it is more than I could have asked for. I have the people of Boothbay Harbor to thank for their endless support in helping me achieve such a great success and growing Shannon's Unshelled into the business it is today," she said.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line944
|
__label__wiki
| 0.671999
| 0.671999
|
Home > Featured > Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI) seeks submissions on media plurality
Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI) seeks submissions on media plurality
By Ann Marie Foley - 17 January, 2019
The BAI states it will “promote a plurality of voices, viewpoints, outlets and sources in Irish media”.
The Family and Media Association (FMA) has urged people to comment on a consultation on media plurality before the end of this month. FMA is sceptical about the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland’s (BAI) record on plurality and diversity in the Irish media, especially after the recent abortion referendum debates, but still urged people to have their say.
“It is always good to put down in black and white the truth,” Donal O’Sullivan Latchford of the Family and Media Association told catholicireland.net. “The truth does not change,” he added. “We have to come back to the truth. It is important not to be dealing with side issues and giving them inordinate importance when the real issues are being ignored. In fact that is one of the main issues we would have with the media at the moment.”
In December BAI launched the public consultations on the new draft Policy on Media Plurality and on Ownership and Control Policy, seeking views from stakeholders and members of the public. In its Statement of Strategy 2017–2019 the BAI states it will “promote a plurality of voices, viewpoints, outlets and sources in Irish media”. So the consultation is on how the BAI understands and promotes and supports media plurality in Ireland.
Speaking at the launch of the consultation, Chief Executive of the BAI, Michael O’Keeffe, said: “Where media plurality is healthy, it ensures citizen access to a variety of information sources, opinions and voices and reduces the undue influence of media and other political, social and commercial organisations or individuals in the formation of public views or the wielding of undue influence over the political process.” He added that freedom of, and access to, information “contributes to the effective participation of citizens in the democratic process.”
FMA stated that BAI’s record in interpreting or understanding terms like plurality and diversity and fairness and balance has not been good. “There was something very wrong in terms of diversity of views in the context of the abortion referendum and all the so-called debates that led up to that in particular. The BAI has done nothing to foster diversity there. In fact it has done quite the opposite; it suppressed it by being dismissive of many quite reasonable and understated complaints about mishandling of those debates by the media. People have lost patience at this stage.”
In the October 2018 complaints report from BAI only 2 out of 20 complaints were upheld in part, and none of the 8 complaints about the referendum and anti-Catholic bias were upheld. Complaints rejected included two pro-choice, four pro-life and two about anti-Catholic bias. The two upheld in part included one about promoting violence against men and another about a court report.
For the consultation on plurality, documents are available on the BAI’s website. They include questions on which the BAI is seeking views. Submissions can include a response to any or all of the consultation questions. Submissions must be made by 30 January 2019.
Responses can be emailed to [email protected] or a form can be completed online. Postal responses can be submitted to: BAI Ownership and Control Consultation, Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, 2–5 Warrington Place, Dublin, D02 XP29.
Tags: Balance, Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI), democratic, Diversity, Fairness, Family and Media Association (FMA), media plurality
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line945
|
__label__wiki
| 0.948292
| 0.948292
|
Lesley Stahl
Correspondent, 60 Minutes
Last Updated May 27, 2020 2:05 PM EDT
Lesley Stahl CBS News
Lesley Stahl is one of America's most honored and experienced broadcast journalists. Her rich career has been marked by political scoops, investigations, surprising features and award-winning foreign reporting, a body of work that won her the Lifetime Achievement Emmy in 2003 for overall excellence in reporting.
She began her 30th season on 60 Minutes in September 2019, having joined the broadcast as a correspondent in March 1991. She is the author of two best-selling books: "Reporting Live," about her work as a White House Correspondent, and more recently, "Becoming Grandma."
Her recent work at 60 Minutes includes three interviews with Donald J. Trump, the first when he was the Republican nominee in 2016; the second was his first television sit-down as President; and more recently a one-on-one at the end of his second year in office.
Nancy Pelosi gave Stahl her first TV interview as Speaker of the House in 2007 and again, when she returned as Speaker, in 2019.
Stahl's revealing interview with the new Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos was the subject of headlines and political talk shows. She earned an Emmy for a shocking 2015 report on how some police recruit vulnerable young people for dangerous jobs as confidential informants. She won her 13th Emmy for her interview with the widow of a slain hostage that offered a rare look inside the technically illegal process of negotiating with terrorists.
In 2013, Stahl gained unprecedented access to the U.S.'s Guantanamo Bay prison facilities for a two-part series honored with an Edward R. Murrow award. In 2014, she won two Emmys, one for the Guantanamo series and another for an eye-opening story about China's huge real estate bubble. Later in 2014, she was honored by the International Center For Journalists with its Founders Award for Journalistic Excellence.
Her uplifting feature, "Gospel for Teens," was recognized with two Emmy Awards in 2012.
That same year, her whistleblower interview with F-22 Raptor pilots provided the first public personal accounts of the fighter's oxygen system troubles, spurring the Secretary of Defense to take action. Stahl's interview of a former CIA Clandestine Services chief about the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" on al Qaeda operatives sparked a national debate.
These are just a few examples of the breadth and variety of stories she has covered. Others include two reports from the Middle East in the fall of 2010, "Unfinished Business," about Iraq, and "City of David," about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which were honored by the Overseas Press Club for Best Interpretation on International Affairs. Her look at the life of a young, musical savant won her an Edward R. Murrow award for feature reporting for her 2008 follow-up on the boy, Rex Lewis-Clack.
Stahl has an impressive portfolio of interviews with CEOs, featuring Larry Page of Google, Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook, Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase, Susan Wojcicki of YouTube, Beth Ford of Land O'Lakes and Reed Hastings of Netflix, among others.
She has paid tribute to her 60 Minutes colleagues in special reports on Mike Wallace, Morley Safer and Bob Simon. She interviewed Steve Kroft on his retirement in 2019.
Prior to joining 60 Minutes, Stahl served as CBS News White House correspondent – the first woman to hold that job – during the Carter and Reagan presidencies and part of the term of George H. W. Bush. Her reports appeared frequently on the CBS Evening News, first with Walter Cronkite, then with Dan Rather, and on other CBS News broadcasts.
During much of that time, she also served as moderator of Face The Nation, CBS News' Sunday public-affairs broadcast (September 1983–May 1991). For Face The Nation, she interviewed such newsmakers as Margaret Thatcher, Boris Yeltsin, Yasser Arafat and virtually every top U.S. official, including George H. W. Bush and Vice President Dan Quayle.
She was co-host with Charles Kuralt of "America Tonight," a daily CBS News late-night broadcast of interviews and essays (October 1990-March 1991).
Her experiences covering Washington for more than 20 years became the subject of her book "Reporting Live" (Simon & Schuster, 1999). In it she recalls covering Watergate – from the break-in in 1972 to the Impeachment hearings of President Nixon in 1974 – as well as the 1981 assassination attempt on President Reagan, and the 1991 Gulf War. She reported on the U.S.-Russian summit meetings and the economic summits of the industrialized countries, as well as the national political conventions and election nights, throughout her career.
Stahl anchored several CBS News documentaries, including "The Politics of Cancer" and "In the Red Blues," about the budget deficit, both for "CBS Reports."
She has a collection of awards besides her Emmys. She won an Alfred I. duPont-Columbia University Silver Baton in 1996 for "Punishing Saddam," which exposed the plight of Iraqi citizens, mostly children, suffering the effects of the United Nations sanctions against Iraq.
In 1996, Stahl was awarded the Fred Friendly First Amendment Award, given by Quinnipiac College, in recognition of her journalistic achievements. In 1990 she was honored with the Dennis Kauff Journalism Award for lifetime achievement in the news profession.
Stahl was born on December 16, 1941, in Swampscott, Massachusetts. She graduated cum laude in 1963 from Wheaton College, where she later served on the board of trustees. She currently serves on the board of the New York City Ballet.
She and her husband, author Aaron Latham, live in New York. They have a daughter, Taylor Latham, and two granddaughters. Jordan and Chloe, the subjects of her book, "Becoming Grandma: the Joy and Science of the New Grandparenting."
© 2020 CBS. All rights reserved.
Recent Segments
Nancy Pelosi: The 2021 60 Minutes interview
Angus King: An independent in the Senate
Georgia's top election official on being pressured by the president
Igor Levit: Pianist streaming performances from his living room
Podcast helps save Curtis Flowers from death row
Get the best of 60 Minutes delivered to your inbox.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line946
|
__label__wiki
| 0.970317
| 0.970317
|
The Northern Ireland Peace Process
A policeman in the rubble of the aftermath of a terrorist attack in Belfast. Henri Bureau/Getty Images
The Good Friday Agreement has dampened sectarian tensions and brought stability to Northern Ireland since 1998, but Brexit negotiations and local political paralysis are throwing the region’s hard-won gains into doubt.
Backgrounder by Charles Landow and Mohammed Aly Sergie
Last updated March 5, 2020
Current political and economic issues succinctly explained.
Northern Ireland, a long-contested region of the United Kingdom, experienced decades of conflict between the late 1960s and the late 1990s that claimed more than 3,500 lives. The era, known as the Troubles, largely pitted the historically dominant Protestants against the Catholic minority. A peace deal struck in April 1998 created a power-sharing government that included political forces aligned with armed groups.
More From Our Experts
Matthias Matthijs
Caroline Bettinger-Lopez
Constitutionalizing Equality: The Equal Rights Amendment as a Catalyst for Change
“Viral Convergence”: Interconnected Pandemics as Portal to Racial Justice
Twenty years later, most of the Belfast Agreement—usually called the Good Friday Agreement—has been implemented. Although paramilitary groups still exist, they have mostly disarmed, and to a large extent violence has ceased. However, sectarian tensions endure, and the United Kingdom’s departure from the European Union is complicating Northern Ireland’s border arrangements, throwing its future into doubt.
What has driven the conflict in Northern Ireland?
Northern Ireland’s modern period of conflict started in the late 1960s and lasted more than three decades. What started as a civil rights movement—Catholics protesting what they saw as discrimination by Northern Ireland’s Protestant-dominated government—deteriorated into violence, with the involvement of paramilitary groups on both sides and the arrival in 1969 of the British Army.
The conflict involved mostly Protestant loyalists, who wanted to remain part of the United Kingdom, against mostly Catholic republicans, who wished to unite with the Republic of Ireland. Protestant unionists and Catholic nationalists shared their respective communities’ goals but tended to eschew violence.
What is the Good Friday Agreement?
Daily News Brief
A summary of global news developments with CFR analysis delivered to your inbox each morning. Most weekdays.
View all newsletters >
Reached in 1998, the Good Friday Agreement provided a framework for political settlement in Northern Ireland centered on power-sharing between unionists and nationalists. It was signed by the British and Irish governments, as well as four of the major political parties in Northern Ireland: Sinn Fein, the Ulster Unionist Party, the Social Democratic and Labour Party, and the Alliance Party. Among major parties, only the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) abstained. While the agreement confirmed that Northern Ireland is a part of the United Kingdom, it stipulates that Ireland could be united if that was supported in a vote by majorities in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.
The agreement called for the devolution of authority over certain policy areas from the UK Parliament to a newly created assembly in Belfast, and it paved the way for paramilitary groups to abandon their weapons and join the political process. It has contributed to a sharp reduction in violence, and the annual conflict-related death toll, which peaked at 480 in 1972, has dropped to the single digits in recent years.
What is the governing structure of Northern Ireland?
The government in Northern Ireland is composed of two main bodies, both based at the Stormont Estate in Belfast.
Legislature. A popularly elected, ninety-member assembly legislates on matters such as health, education, and agriculture. The assembly requires support from both unionists and nationalists to make important decisions, ensuring that neither can dominate.
Executive. A cabinet-like executive administers the government. It is chaired by a first minister and a deputy first minister, one from each main tradition. So far, the first minister has always been a unionist and the deputy first minister a nationalist or republican.
Has the Good Friday Agreement been successful?
Distrust among the factions persisted for years after the accord. Political jockeying over devolution—the transfer of police, judicial, and other powers from London to Belfast—and the decommissioning of paramilitary groups’ weapons hindered implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. While London devolved local powers in late 1999, political turmoil in Northern Ireland prompted it to reimpose direct rule in 2000 and again in 2002. London only restored the devolved government in 2007, with the breakthrough St. Andrews Agreement, signed by the UK and Irish governments and Northern Ireland’s main parties. By then, the DUP was the largest unionist party and Sinn Fein the largest among nationalists and republicans.
Another milestone came in 2010 with the Hillsborough Agreement, in which Sinn Fein and the DUP finally agreed on terms for the devolution of policing and justice functions, as well as a roadmap for managing sectarian parades. By the mid-2010s, the political institutions envisioned in the Good Friday Agreement were generally functioning well, as parties with starkly differing views served together in government.
What is the status of Northern Ireland’s government?
The relative political stability in Belfast began to unravel in 2017, when an energy scandal precipitated the resignation of Sinn Fein’s Martin McGuinness as deputy first minister. This caused the executive’s collapse and led to fresh elections for the assembly in March 2017. The DUP remained the largest single party, but its advantage over Sinn Fein fell to just one seat, a result indicative of Northern Ireland’s demographic shifts: as of the last census [PDF], in 2011, the minority Catholic community had increased to 45 percent of the population, while Protestants were no longer a majority, at 48 percent. The impasse also highlighted deep divisions over Brexit, which the unionist DUP favored and Sinn Fein, along with other major parties, opposed.
The DUP and Sinn Fein were unable to resolve their differences for nearly three years, leaving Northern Ireland without a local government until early 2020. Under pressure to compromise or face another round of elections—and with the DUP sidelined from the UK government after a commanding election win by Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s Conservative Party in December 2019—the two parties made a deal that reopened Stormont on January 11, 2020.
In a major compromise, the parties agreed to measures to promote the Irish language, something unionists have long opposed over concerns it will elevate nationalist and republican culture at the expense of their own. In return, the agreement contained provisions to promote Ulster-Scots, which is traditionally spoken by the descendants of Protestants who came to Northern Ireland from Scotland. Negotiations were also moved along by promises from Dublin and London for more funding to Northern Ireland’s hospitals, schools, and other social services.
Comprised of Northern Ireland’s five primary political parties, the revived executive is led by Prime Minister Arlene Foster (DUP) and newly appointed Deputy First Minister Michelle O’Neill (Sinn Fein). This marks the first time two women lead the devolved government.
What challenges remain?
Northern Ireland’s restored leadership faces difficult challenges in providing basic services as well as addressing sectarian divisions. One of the most urgent tasks is to improve health services, which fell deeper into crisis after the breakdown of local government. Some three hundred thousand people—roughly one-sixth of the population—were on waiting lists for health care by late 2019, and nurses and other staff went on strike in December of that year to protest salaries that had fallen below those in the rest of the UK. By February 2020, many health unions had reached agreements with the government for increased pay and other demands, though whether the health sector is on a sustainable path remains an open question.
Meanwhile, sectarian divisions remain prominent. Fewer than 10 percent of students in Northern Ireland attend religiously integrated schools, or those not primarily associated with a single faith. Social interaction between the two main religious communities remains limited. Dozens of so-called peace walls divide Protestant and Catholic neighborhoods.
Northern Ireland’s restored leadership faces difficult challenges in providing basic services as well as addressing sectarian divisions.
Other long-standing issues continue to cause friction. Parades and marches—held mainly but not exclusively by Protestant groups—often have heavily sectarian undertones. The same is true of flags and emblems, displayed by all sides on lampposts and buildings. Moreover, Northern Ireland’s leaders have never developed a comprehensive approach to the legacy of past violence, as some other postconflict societies have. Efforts to prosecute those responsible for killings and to pursue other initiatives have been uneven, which analysts say has hindered reconciliation.
These issues—parades, flags, and the legacy of the past—were the subject of 2013 negotiations chaired by Richard N. Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, and Meghan L. O’Sullivan, a professor at the Harvard Kennedy School and now on CFR’s Board of Directors. The talks, which involved the five main political parties, did not produce an agreement, though many of the proposals—including establishing a historical investigations unit to look into unsolved deaths during the conflict and a commission to help victims get information about relatives’ deaths—formed a large part of the Stormont House Agreement, reached in 2014.
After years of standstill, the UK government pledged to implement legacy-related institutions outlined in the 2014 agreement as part of the January 2020 accord to restore Stormont. However, uncertainty persists, especially regarding how Johnson’s government will handle investigations into former members of the UK security services over their actions in Northern Ireland’s conflict.
How will Brexit affect Northern Ireland?
A majority of Northern Ireland’s people—almost 56 percent—voted for the UK to remain in the EU. The DUP was alone among Northern Ireland’s main parties in supporting Brexit. A significant amount of direct funding is at stake: since 1995, the EU has provided Northern Ireland with more than one billion euros per year for peacebuilding and reconciliation programs. Despite Brexit, the current funding program is set to last through the end of 2021, with a budget of 270 million euros.
The most contentious issue has been Northern Ireland’s border with the Republic of Ireland. The border, which was heavily militarized during the conflict, has since become essentially invisible, with people and goods crossing freely. This was possible in large part because both Ireland and the UK were part of the EU’s single market, the common set of regulations that allows for the free movement of goods, services, people, and money within the bloc.
With Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK having officially left the EU in January 2020, this will change. Throughout Brexit negotiations, EU, Irish, and UK officials have all sought to avoid the return of a hard border, fearing that checkpoints could complicate trade, revive tensions between communities, and open the door to renewed violence. Yet London’s commitment to leaving the EU single market and customs union has made some sort of border checks inevitable.
The most contentious issue has been Northern Ireland’s border with the Republic of Ireland.
The final withdrawal agreement between the EU and the UK settled on a complicated solution to this thorny problem. Under the planned arrangements, Northern Ireland would, like the rest of the UK, leave the EU customs union, the basis for common tariffs on all goods entering the bloc. However, any necessary customs checks would take place not on the border with the Republic of Ireland but rather between Northern Ireland and Great Britain—in effect, creating a new border in the Irish Sea. Meanwhile, Northern Ireland—but not the rest of the UK—would continue to follow many of the EU single market regulations, allowing the land border with Ireland to remain open. This arrangement is also aided by a separate Ireland-UK agreement that allows free movement of people between the two countries.
This outcome raised the ire of Northern Ireland’s unionists, who fear any distinction between their region and the rest of the UK. The Johnson government is seeking to minimize such a distinction, but the extent of disruption to Northern Ireland’s economy and politics remains to be seen.
The final details of the United Kingdom’s economic relationship with the EU—including how intertwined it will be with the EU single market—are still being worked out in trade talks. Brussels and London have until December 31, 2020, to complete those negotiations. Until then, the UK, including Northern Ireland, remains part of the single market and customs union.
What is the future of the peace process?
Some observers fear that the UK’s departure from the EU threatens the Good Friday Agreement; they include Tony Blair, the UK prime minister who presided over the accord. The Irish prime minister, Leo Varadkar, echoed this point in March 2018, arguing that Brexit “threatens to drive a wedge between Britain and Ireland, between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, and potentially between the two communities in Northern Ireland.” (Varadkar announced his resignation after his party suffered losses in Ireland’s February 2020 parliamentary elections.) Sinn Fein leaders have called Brexit “the most serious threat in the history of the peace process.”
That is because the Good Friday Agreement established intricate arrangements among the various parties. The Three Strands of the pact created a web of institutions to govern Northern Ireland (Strand One), bring together leaders in Northern Ireland with those in Ireland (Strand Two, or North-South cooperation), and bring together leaders from throughout the UK and Ireland (Strand Three, or East-West cooperation). There are currently more than 140 areas of Northern Ireland–Republic of Ireland cross-border cooperation, including on health-care services, energy infrastructure, and policing. Many experts and political leaders fear that any disruption to this cooperation could undermine trust in the agreement and thus the basis of peace in Northern Ireland.
Though Prime Minister Johnson and Irish leaders have pledged to protect the Good Friday Agreement, some Brexit supporters have seized the opportunity to criticize the deal’s power-sharing institutions, arguing that the pact is outdated. Some in the DUP, which opposed the agreement in 1998, have also questioned the arrangements it established.
At the same time, the Republic of Ireland’s February 2020 elections augur a changing political climate, with unpredictable implications for the island. In addition to the defeat of Varadkar’s centrist party, Fine Gael, the election saw the dramatic rise of republican Sinn Fein, which won the most votes and expanded its seats in parliament from twenty-two to thirty-seven. However, with no party winning an outright majority and the two main centrist parties ruling out entering into a government with Sinn Fein, coalition talks are likely to be fraught.
Perhaps the ultimate question is whether Brexit could lead Northern Ireland’s people to vote to leave the UK and join a united Ireland, for which the Good Friday Agreement allows. Since the 2016 Brexit vote, Northern Ireland’s nationalist and republican leaders have called for a referendum. That would require London’s approval, as well as a separate vote in the Republic of Ireland. Sinn Fein has said it will refuse to join any government that doesn’t start organizing such a referendum, and its electoral success has brought that possibility squarely to the fore.
Diana Roy contributed to this report.
The Congressional Research Service [PDF] examines the Northern Ireland peace process.
In Foreign Affairs, Henry Farrell analyzes the repercussions of Brexit on the Good Friday Agreement.
A 2018 Economist report takes stock of the situation in Northern Ireland twenty years after the peace deal.
The University of Ulster operates an expansive archive of information and primary sources on the Troubles.
CFR President Richard N. Haass discusses the 2013 talks in Northern Ireland in a Foreign Affairs video.
Explore More on United Kingdom
How Dangerous Are New COVID-19 Strains?
The global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines is underway, but the emergence of new coronavirus strains threatens to make the pandemic far worse before it gets better.
In Brief by Claire Felter January 7, 2021
What Would a No-Deal Brexit Look Like?
The United Kingdom and the European Union have been unable to reach a deal to define their post-Brexit relationship after nearly a year of talks. A severe disruption to trade between them looks increasingly likely.
In Brief by Andrew Chatzky and Anshu Siripurapu December 14, 2020
Top Stories on CFR
China’s Starring Role in Hollywood
What does it take to make a Hollywood blockbuster? Movie stars? A great script? How about approval from the Chinese government? In this episode, two guests explore the surprising role of Chinese censorship and oversight in the production of U.S. films and ask what’s at stake as their presence increases.
Podcast with Gabrielle Sierra, Aynne Kokas and James Tager January 6, 2021 Why It Matters
Donald Trump’s Costly Legacy
History will judge the Trump presidency to have been a consequential one, but more for its destructive effects than for its achievements.
by Richard N. Haass January 11, 2021
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line955
|
__label__wiki
| 0.963419
| 0.963419
|
Is democracy in Hong Kong forever blunted?
As China flexes its muscles with a new security law and the arrest of pro-democracy advocates, Insight asks if it marks the end of the territory’s dream of democracy.
Riot police in Hong Kong after protesters gather at Yau Ma Tei for a protest on Sep 6, 2020 against the new national security law. (Photo: Hong Kong Police)
By Genevieve Woo @GenWooCNA
By and Desmond Ng
24 Sep 2020 07:00AM
HONG KONG: Jacob Mak had been looking forward to voting in the Legislative Council (Legco) election slated for Sep 6. It would, he felt, give him an opportunity to help shape the city’s future.
But that excitement turned into angry disappointment, when the election was postponed for a full year, amid a resurgence of COVID-19 cases.
“That is totally not acceptable because it lacks a legal basis,” the 40-year-old said. Another disappointed voter, paralegal Angie Te, pointed out that Singapore and South Korea held elections in the middle of the pandemic.
To voters like them and opposition leaders, it’s another sign that pro-Beijing officials are trying to silence the pro-democracy movement. In June, Hong Kong authorities barred 12 pro-democracy candidates from the Legco election, which are held once in every four years.
Pro-democracy activists Joshua Wong, Eddie Chu and Lester Shum arrive at the West Kowloon Courts to face charges related to illegal assembly in Hong Kong, Sep 15, 2020. (REUTERS/Tyrone Siu)
Then in August, the police arrested several prominent pro-democracy advocates, including social activist Agnes Chow and media mogul Jimmy Lai, an outspoken critic of China’s Communist party.
The cautious optimism that emerged following the transfer of Hong Kong’s sovereignty to China in 1997 appears to have vanished – replaced by a sense of foreboding, and a growing pessimism among residents about their future, with some now afraid to speak their minds for fear of reprisals.
In a recent episode, the programme Insight asked: Is there still a future for democracy in the city?
WATCH: The end for Hong Kong’s democracy movement? (5:52)
SAFETY OR EXCUSE?
The Legco is Hong Kong’s top decision-making body, but only half the 70 seats are directly elected by the public, while the other half are mostly filled with Beijing loyalists.
To the pro-democracy camp, the September polls would have been an opportunity to make their voices heard after the turbulent events of the past year. It was perceived as their first real shot at capturing majority seats in the legislature.
But on July 31, Hong Kong’s chief executive Carrie Lam announced she was invoking the Emergency Regulations Law to postpone the polls, insisting it was for the safety of the people in Hong Kong.
Bernard Chan, convenor of Hong Kong's Executive Council, noted that a large turnout of at least 3 million voters would indeed contradict social distancing restrictions. “It doesn’t make sense,” he said, noting that elections in other countries had been similarly cancelled or postponed.
FILE PHOTO: A student wears a surgical mask to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in Hong Kong. (Reuters/Tyrone Siu)
He added that disqualified candidates could always appeal through the courts and get themselves re-instated. “In fact, over the last couple of years, we have candidates who actually won the appeal,” he said.
New Zealand - with relatively low rates of infection and deaths – called off its polls but South Korea and Singapore went ahead with theirs.
Hong Kong Legco member Claudia Mo said the impression given was that “the Carrie Lam administration obviously has taken advantage of this coronavirus panic and scare to postpone the legislative election”.
A NEW CLIMATE OF FEAR?
In the municipal District Council election held last November, Hong Kong voters registered their deep unhappiness with the government. Pro-Beijing candidates lost two-thirds of their seats.
But Beijing’s patience with the territory apparently ran out. On June 30, the central government unilaterally passed the controversial National Security Law criminalising any act of secession, subversion and collusion with foreign and external forces.
The pro-democracy movement sees it as an attempt to silence critics. And Mak, a consultant in the manufacturing industry, says the impact has been felt.
“The locals have started changing their names on Facebook, trying to go anonymous to… speak their truth,” he said. “That’s not the way it was when Hong Kong was under a strict common law regime.”
Known for being outspoken, will Hong Kong residents now dial back?
Associate Prof Alfred M Wu, assistant dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, echoes this observation. “You can see people now actually deleting their social media accounts… They are trying to decline interviews from journalists.
“Those are very clear signs that they are trying to protect themselves. They are not as outspoken as before,” he added.
Mo cited meeting a taxi driver recently, who told her: “I used to talk freely about what I think about the government with my passengers. But now I’d better be careful because I have my registration label here with my name and my vehicle number.”
WATCH: Democratic crisis in Hong Kong – the full episode (48:30)
Sing Ming, an associate professor at Hong Kong University of Science & Technology, said the three developments – the postponed election, disqualification of candidates, and the Security law – showed that Beijing leaders “can no longer tolerate the public political dissent in Hong Kong”.
Wu also believes that Beijing does not want “Hong Kong people’s so-called liberal mindsets” to spread to the mainland.
The government has said that nothing has really changed, and that people can continue to exercise their democratic rights.
Bernard Chan thinks that like what happened after the handover of Hong Kong by the British in 1997, it will take time to prove to residents that they will continue to have that freedom.
“Of course, provided you don't cross the line…. subverting the state power or asking for the independence of Hong Kong,” he added.
Indeed some, like IT entrepreneur Louis Chan, just want stability to return to the territory, even if that means giving China more powers to manage the city’s affairs.
“Last year, you could see fires burning in front of the courts… People who hold different political views can be beaten on the streets. It is a chaotic society,” he lamented.
For the pro-democracy camp, the challenge will be how to keep the momentum going until the rescheduled Legco election next September, and to survive in a much tougher environment.
“I think the public expect them to keep on their fight for maintaining our civil liberties,” said Ming. “The public also expects them to fight in a smart way – evade arrests so that they can still operate, they can still function.”
Watch the full Insight episode on Hong Kong’s democratic crisis here.
Source: cna/yv
national security law.elections
Love CNA Insider videos and stories?
Get the week's stories and documentaries in your inbox every Sunday
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line956
|
__label__wiki
| 0.632059
| 0.632059
|
Nobel winners call for energy R&D funding
By Rebecca Trager2009-07-21T12:25:00+01:00
Nobel Prize winners urge US president to provide increased, stable funding for clean energy alternatives
Thirty-four Nobel Prize winners, including six prominent researchers who won the award for chemistry, are urging US President Obama to make good on his pledge to provide increased, stable funding for energy research and development. The renowned scientists are concerned that the climate change and energy legislation that is currently making its way through Congress would provide only a tiny fraction of the $150 billion (?91.3 billion) that Obama proposed to go to a so-called Clean Energy Technology Fund over ten years.
In their 16 July letter to Obama, the Nobel laureates emphasise the importance of the President’s proposed plan, to be funded by a greenhouse gas cap and trade programme: ’the stable support this Fund would provide is essential to pay for the research and development needed if the US, as well as the developing world, are to achieve their goals in reducing greenhouse gases at an affordable cost.’ They want him to argue his case to Congress.
The American Clean Energy and Security Act passed through the House of Representatives on 26 June and soon will be considered by the Senate. It would provide less than one-fifteenth of the amount Obama proposed for federal energy research, development, and demonstration programmes.
Under the legislation, a national cap and trade programme would be established to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from major sources by 17 per cent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050, compared to 2005 levels. The proposed system would be based on the use of emissions permits that each cover one tonne of carbon dioxide emissions.
Over 30 Nobel Prize winners have expressed concern about funding for energy research and development
The laureates express concern that the bill in question fails to provide steady, specific funding for sustained research in the US Department of Energy’s Office of Science, or for its energy research and associated technology development programmes - like those focused on energy efficiency and renewable energy, electricity deliverability, as well as fossil and nuclear resources.
’The most important molecule involved in global warming is carbon dioxide,’ says University of California-Irvine’s F. Sherwood Rowland, who won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1995 for his work on the effect of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) on the ozone layer, and signed the letter to Obama.’The question for chemists is how to get substitutes for energy from fossil fuels, for example, or finding a way to put fossil fuels somewhere other than the atmosphere - those are technologically achievable goals, but they have a longer-range aspect,’ he tells Chemistry World.
’What we are looking for is energy solutions that are advanced and that can last for centuries or more, and chemists will need to be working on these things for an extended period of time,’ Rowland adds. For example, he suggests that chemists need to find the appropriate chemical techniques to trap energy from the sun, and they need to develop a material that can be placed into water to get energy out.
The American Chemistry Council (ACC), a major US chemical trade group, appears to agree with the Nobel laureates.
’An effective national climate policy must be able to foster the development of new technologies, in a timeframe that makes sense,’ says Mike Walls, ACC’s vice president for regulatory and technical affairs. ’Support for research and development activities is a critical component of that effort.’
But some, including University of Southern California’s George Olah - another chemistry Nobel laureate who signed the letter to Obama - say researchers should not wait for money to come from Congress. ’I am 82 years old,’ Olah tells Chemistry World. ’If I would wait for legislation and the bureaucratic process to be completed, I wouldn’t be here anymore.’
Rebecca Trager, US correspondent for Research Europe
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line958
|
__label__wiki
| 0.795441
| 0.795441
|
Cheo Bourne and Lena Moy-Borgen have teamed up for a new variety cabaret show! Watch them, your party planning committee, as they curate an awesome party for you, complete with special appearances by the Employee of the Month and Temps! REVIEW!
Past Employee of The Month was Joel Perez (Broadway’s Fun Home, Jesus Christ Superstar Live on NBC, Lucille Lortel Award for Outstanding Featured Actor in a Musical) and past month’s Temps were Julissa Miranda (Singer/Songwriter, Mama’s Next Big Act Top 5, 2016) and Lisa Yaeger (First Runner Up Mama’s Next Big Act Top 5, 2015, Bistro Award winner 2018).
Past Dates: June, August, October and November 2018 as well as January, April, June and October 2019
HELLO: a cabaret with Cheo Bourne
February 16, 25, and 28 2018
MUSICAL DIRECTION BY ANDREW DAVID SOTOMAYOR
COVER $15
(2 DRINK MINIMUM)
www.donttellmamanyc.com
- a new musical -
SHOW SITE
The Gym at Judson Theater
-Cheo Bourne in concert-
June 8th at 9:30pm
The Duplex Cabaret Theater
Tickets $20 in advance / $25 at the door *two drink minimum
After traveling the world with The Platters, one of the most successful groups of the early rock and roll era, Cheo Bourne steps into his own spotlight to sing some of the most powerful selections from the world of musical theater, pop and soul. Touché explores his humbling journey of self discovery through the power of music. Join Mr. Bourne at the historic Duplex Cabaret Theatre in raising a toast to life, love and the pursuit of fencing.
In April 2013 Cheo happily joined internationally famed vocal group The Platters and toured with them until early 2016. The Platters were one of the most successful vocal groups of the early rock and roll era with hits like "Only You", "The Great Pretender", "Twilight Time", "Smoke Gets in Your Eyes" and "My Prayer". Their distinctive sound was a bridge between the pre-rock the burgeoning new genre. The original group had 40 charting singles on the Billboard Hot 100 chart between 1955 and 1967, including four no. 1 hits.
Cheo toured with the group for nearly three years and he performed in England, Japan, Scotland, China, Brazil, all throughout the Caribbean isles and throughout the USA.
THE CABARET SERIES
In August 2011 co-creators Kami Smith and De'Lon Grant gathered four friends - Brian Richard Robinson, Cheo Bourne, Jennifer Ellis, and Tim Maurice - for an evening of cabaret at the Charles Playhouse Lounge. This one-time event gave birth to The Cabaret Series, a fusing of music and story in a freshly imagined cabaret setting, with the goal of making this classic form accessible to a contemporary audience. The rest of the 2011-2012 season, produced in partnership with Central Square Theater in Cambridge, Massachusetts included Journey Home (December 2011), You and I (February 2012) and Get Ready (June 2012) and Never Far From Home was at Central Square Theater (June 2013).
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line959
|
__label__wiki
| 0.908389
| 0.908389
|
Home Entertainment Oscars 2019: GREEN BOOK Wins Best Picture, BLACK PANTHER Wins Three Oscars
Oscars 2019: GREEN BOOK Wins Best Picture, BLACK PANTHER Wins Three Oscars
Edward Douglas
The 91st Annual Academy Awards (aka the Oscars) were handed out by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences on Sunday night, February 24 at a host-less ceremony at the Dolby Theatre in Hollywood.
There were quite a few surprises but none of the eight movies nominated for Best Picture went home empty-handed, as awards were handed out rather diplomatically between them.
While Peter Farrelly’s Green Book won three Oscars, including Best Picture, Original Screenplay and Mahershala Ali’s second Oscar in the Supporting Actor category, another big winner of the night was the equally controversial Bohemian Rhapsody.
The Freddie Mercury and Queen biopic won four of the five Oscars it was nominated for including a Lead Actor win for Rami Malek, who played Freddie. The musical drama also won in the Film Editing, Sound Editing and Sound Mixing categories.
Marvel Studios’ Black Panther, the first superhero or comic book movie to be nominated for Best Picture, went home with three Oscars, for Costume Design, Production Design and Original Score. This is one more than Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight won ten years back.
Thought to be a favorite for Best Picture, Alfonso Cuaron’s Roma, received three Oscars, one for Cuaron for directing, another for Cuaron for his cinematography and a third in the Foreign Language category. Not winning Best Picture meant that there still hasn’t been a foreign language film to take that honor in 91 years of the Oscars.
Barry Jenkins’ If Beale Street Could Talk, which won top honors at the Independent Spirit Awards on Saturday, went home with one Oscar for Supporting Actress Regina King. Annapurna’s other offering, Adam McKay’s Vice, received an Oscar for its hair and make-up used to transform Christian Bale into former Vice President Dick Cheney.
Furthermore, the now-legendary Star is Born jinx continued with the latest remake directed by Bradley Cooper (who wasn’t even nominated for his direction). Despite receiving eight nominations, it only won one for the Original Song “Shallow,” which was performed by co-writer/actor Lady Gaga and Cooper in a rousing show-stopper. The previous version of A Star is Born from 1976, which starred Barbra Streisand — who oddly presented Spike Lee’s BlacKkKlansman during the ceremony — also only won a single Oscar for Original Song out of four nominations. The 1954 movie with Judy Garland was nominated for six nominations and won none, while the 1938 movie also won a single Oscar out of six nominations.
Spike Lee’s BlacKkKlansman did take home the Oscar for Adapted Screenplay, making it Lee’s first Oscar win, if you disregard the Governors Award (aka Lifetime Achievement Oscar) he received a few years back.
As the night wore on, it seemed like Yorgos Lanthimos’ The Favourite, nominated for ten Oscars, might get shut-out. Things turned around later in the evening when the film’s Olivia Colman won Lead Actress in a surprise victory over the popular favorite (and multiple Oscar nominee) Glenn Close for The Wife.
Sony Pictures Animation took home its very first Oscar with the Animated Feature win by Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, while the Disney animated short Bao won in that category.
The mountain-climbing doc Free Solo took home the Oscar in the Documentary Feature category.
Final tally puts Bohemian Rhapsody at four Oscars, and Green Book, Roma and Black Panther at three each.
Previous articleOscar’s Razor: The Simple Solution to Make the Oscars Run On Time
Next articleBox Office: HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON Ends February on a High Note
Edward Douglas has been writing about movies and other forms of entertainment for over 25 years, so he's probably older than you.
George 02/25/2019 4:27 pm At 4:27 pm
L.A. Times’ Justin Chang writes: “‘Green Book’ is the worst best picture winner since ‘Crash'”:
//www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-oscars-green-book-worst-best-picture-winner-20190224-story.html
As for the “Star is Born” jinx, only one version — the one from 1954 — deserved a best picture nomination. And it wasn’t as good as that year’s winner, “On the Waterfront.”
Kaleb 02/25/2019 5:52 pm At 5:52 pm
Great that Roma got what it did but it could have gone that one better. Blackkklansman would have been a better choice than the one taken.
Highlights were Olivia Colman and Spike Lee. I wanted Vice to somehow get recognition more than just makeup.
And now, for a less depressing movie story:
https://thetakeout.com/texas-chainsaw-massacre-gas-station-hotel-bbq-restauran-1832871791
Kaleb 02/26/2019 12:14 am At 12:14 am
The number of nominations for both Vice and The Favourite place them in good stead though, now that I think about it, even though the one win for each.
Brian 03/01/2019 7:25 am At 7:25 am
Finally got to see Spider-man: Into the Spider-verse. Such a great flick. Such a unique vision. Glad it won.
WAY OF X, Marvel’s newest Reign of X title, coming from...
INTERVIEW: Subverting expectations with the cast & crew of BATMAN: SOUL...
The Comic Book Shopping Experience aims to build a new platform...
Jack Kirby’s son denounces Capitol attackers who wore Captain America symbols
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line961
|
__label__wiki
| 0.711492
| 0.711492
|
10 Reasons to Love Uruguay’s President José Mujica
A former Uruguayan guerrilla leader, President Jose Mujica is showing world leaders a new way to govern. (Credit: Creative Commons / Pable Porciuncula / AFP/Getty)
President José Mujica of Uruguay, a 78-year-old former Marxist guerrilla who spent 14 years in prison, mostly in solitary confinement, recently visited the United States to meet with President Obama and speak at a variety of venues. He told Obama that Americans should smoke less and learn more languages. He lectured a roomful of businessmen at the US Chamber of Commerce about the benefits of redistributing wealth and raising workers’ salaries. He told students at American University that there are no “just wars.” Whatever the audience, he spoke extemporaneously and with such brutal honesty that it was hard not to love the guy. Here are 10 reasons you, too, should love President Mujica.
1. He lives simply and rejects the perks of the presidency. Mujica has refused to live at the Presidential Palace or have a motorcade. He lives in a one-bedroom house on his wife’s farm and drives a 1987 Volkswagen. “There have been years when I would have been happy just to have a mattress,” said Mujica, referring to his time in prison. He donates over 90% of his $12,000/month salary to charity so he makes the same as the average citizen in Uruguay. When called “the poorest president in the world,” Mujica says he is not poor. “A poor person is not someone who has little but one who needs infinitely more, and more and more. I don’t live in poverty, I live in simplicity. There’s very little that I need to live.”
2. He supported the nation’s groundbreaking legalization of marijuana. “In no part of the world has repression of drug consumption brought results. It’s time to try something different,” Mujica said. So this year, Uruguay became the first country in the world to regulate the legal production, sale, and consumption of marijuana. The law allows individuals to grow a certain amount each year and the government controls the price of marijuana sold at pharmacies. The law requires consumers, sellers, and distributors to be licensed by the government. Uruguay’s experience aims to take the market away from the ruthless drug traffickers and treat drug addiction as a public health issue. Their experiment will have reverberations worldwide.
3. In August 2013, Mujica signed the bill making Uruguay the second nation in Latin America (after Argentina) to legalize gay marriage. He said that legalizing gay marriage is simply recognizing reality. “Not to legalize it would be unnecessary torture for some people,” he said. In recent years, Uruguay has also moved to allow adoption by gay couples and openly gay people to serve in the armed forces.
4. He’s not afraid to confront corporate abuses, as evidenced by the epic struggle his government is waging against the American tobacco giant Philip Morris. A former smoker, Mujica says that tobacco is a killer that needs to be brought under control. But Philip Morris is suing Uruguay for $25 million at the World Bank’s International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes because of the country’s tough smoking laws that prohibit smoking in enclosed public spaces and require warning labels, including graphic images of the health effects. Uruguay is the first Latin American country and the fifth nation worldwide to implement a ban on smoking in enclosed public places. Philip Morris, the largest cigarette manufacturer in the United States, has huge global business interests (and a well-paid army of lawyers). Uruguay’s battle against the tobacco Goliath will also have global repercussions.
5. He supported the legalization of abortion in Uruguay (his predecessor had vetoed the bill). The law is very limited, compared to laws in the US and Europe. It allows abortions within the first 12 weeks of the pregnancy and requires women to meet with a panel of doctors and social workers on the risks and possible effects of an abortion. But this law is the most liberal abortion law in socially conservative, Catholic Latin America and is clearly a step in the right direction for women’s reproductive rights.
6. He’s an environmentalist trying to limit needless consumption. At the Rio+20 Summit in 2012, he criticized the model of development pushed by affluent societies. “We can almost recycle everything now. If we lived within our means – by being prudent – the 7 billion people in the world could have everything they needed. Global politics should be moving in that direction," he said. He also recently rejected a joint energy project with Brazil that would have provided his country with cheap coal energy because of his concern for the environment.
7. He has focusing on redistributing his nation’s wealth, claiming that his administration has reduced poverty from 37% to 11%. “Businesses just want to increase their profits; it’s up to the government to make sure they distribute enough of those profits so workers have the money to buy the goods they produce,” he told businessmen at the US Chamber of Commerce. “It’s no mystery--the less poverty, the more commerce. The most important investment we can make is in human resources.” His government’s redistributive policies include setting prices for essential commodities such as milk and providing free computers and education for every child.
8. He has offered to take detainees cleared for release from Guantanamo. Mujica has called the detention center at Guantanamo Bay a “disgrace” and insisted that Uruguay take responsibility to help close the facility. The proposal is unpopular in Uruguay, but Mujica, who was a political prisoner for 14 years, said he is “doing this for humanity.”
9. He is opposed to war and militarism. “The world spends $2 billion a minute on military spending,” he exclaimed in horror to the students at American University. “I used to think there were just, noble wars, but I don’t think that anymore,” said the former armed guerrilla. “Now I think the only solution is negotiations. The worst negotiation is better than the best war, and the only way to insure peace is to cultivate tolerance.”
10. He has an adorable three-legged dog, Manuela! Manuela lost a foot when Mujica accidentally ran over it with a tractor. Since then, Mujica and Manuela have been almost inseparable.
Mujica’s influence goes far beyond that of the leader of a tiny country of only 3 million people. In a world hungry for alternatives, the innovations that he and his colleagues are championing have put Uruguay on the map as one of the world’s most exciting experiments in creative, progressive governance.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
Medea Benjamin, co-founder of Global Exchange and CODEPINK: Women for Peace, is the author of the 2018 book, "Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran". Her previous books include: "Kingdom of the Unjust: Behind the U.S.-Saudi Connection" (2016); "Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control" (2013); "Don’t Be Afraid Gringo: A Honduran Woman Speaks from the Heart" (1989), and (with Jodie Evans) "Stop the Next War Now (Inner Ocean Action Guide)" (2005). Follow her on Twitter: @medeabenjamin
Senior UN Human Rights Official 'Deeply Concerned' by Trump's Pardons for Mercenaries Who Massacred 17 Iraqi Civilians
UN Human Rights Expert Urges US to Lift Sanctions That 'May Exacerbate the Already Dire Humanitarian Situation in Syria'
Citing 'Open Sedition,' Rep. Ilhan Omar Vows Trump Impeachment Resolution
'Despicable': Outgoing Trump Administration to Designate Cuba a 'State Sponsor of Terrorism'
Uruguay, Medea Benjamin
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line962
|
__label__wiki
| 0.832789
| 0.832789
|
Impeachment Is Designed for Presidents Like Trump
Should the House vote to impeach Trump, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans will be left with two choices, neither of which is likely to boost Trump’s reelection chances.
Bill Blum
President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence exit following Trump's Aug. 5 speech in the White House about the mass shootings in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio. (Photo: Evan Vucci / AP)
It’s easy to understand why a majority of House Democrats have finally gone on record to call for an impeachment inquiry of President Donald J. Trump. Not only has he committed the requisite “high crimes and misdemeanors” to trigger such an inquiry, but an argument can be made that he’s the most corrupt and treacherous commander in chief in modern American history. The stage is set for Congress to act, regardless of how the Senate responds.
Bearing in mind impeachable offenses do not have to be crimes in the formal sense and they may include behavior prior to the target assuming office, Trump’s offenses include but are by no means limited to:
Committing campaign finance violations by paying hush money to two women with whom he allegedly had extramarital affairs, Karen McDougal and porn star Stormy Daniels;
Obstructing justice in connection with the investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller;
Defying congressional subpoenas;
Using the presidency for personal economic gain;
Abusing the pardon power to reward political allies;
Attacking the press and the judiciary;
Threatening to prosecute political opponents;
Abusing emergency powers to build his border wall;
Incarcerating undocumented immigrant children in concentration camps;
Attempting to strip millions of Americans of health insurance;
Promoting tax reform to benefit the super-rich;
Gutting environmental regulations and pulling out of the Paris climate accord;
Refusing to enforce the Voting Rights Act; and
Curbing the use of federal consent decrees to counter police misconduct.
The bill of particulars that can be drafted against Trump is practically limitless. But beyond the specifics, there is a more fundamental reason to insist on impeachment: Trump is a racist and a fascist.
Anyone who doubts that Trump is a racist either is extraordinarily gullible, isn’t paying attention, doesn’t care, or worse, is a racist himself or herself.
Trump has been a practicing white supremacist his entire adult life. In the early 1970s, he and his father were successfully sued by the Justice Department for refusing to rent apartments to non-whites. In 1989, Trump took out full-page ads in major New York City newspapers urging the death penalty for five black and Latino teenagers, the “Central Park Five,” falsely accused of raping a white woman. To this day, he refuses to acknowledge the five teens were innocent, as confirmed by DNA testing.
During the previous administration, Trump was a prime architect of the “birther” conspiracy, alleging that President Obama was born in Kenya. In December 2015, he called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.” As president, he implemented a more targeted version of the travel ban, initially directed against seven Muslim-majority nations and later revised following several adverse federal rulings. The modified ban was subsequently upheld in a shameless abdication of judicial independence by the Republican-dominated Supreme Court.
Last month, Trump tweeted that four minority Democratic congresswomen—the so-called Squad” consisting of Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts—should “go back” to the “totally broken and crime-infested” countries they came from. All four are U.S. citizens; only Omar was born abroad.
In response to Trump’s tweet, Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., a celebrated veteran of the civil rights movement, said, “I know racism when I see it, I know racism when I feel it, and at the highest level of government, there’s no room for racism.”
To its credit, the House has since passed a resolution condemning Trump’s posts as racist. But the resolution is non-binding, and it is by no means sufficient.
Intercept reporter Shaun King argued in a recent column that racism should be considered an impeachable offense. Both the history of impeachment and the gravity of racism as an affront to the nation support King’s assertions.
As political science professor Peter Irons, the author of “A People’s History of the Supreme Court,” observed in an NBC.com column last week, President Andrew Johnson was impeached at the mid-point of his first and only term precisely because of his racism—specifically his opposition to post-Civil War Reconstruction programs.
Like Trump today, Johnson’s rhetoric and policies brought the “high office of the president of the United States into contempt, ridicule and disgrace.” And while Johnson avoided conviction and removal from office by a single vote in the Senate, Irons noted that impeachment left Johnson “crippled and ineffective in his two remaining years in office.”
Fascism, too, should be considered impeachable. And lest there be any confusion, Trump is not simply a product or “symptom” of late capitalism in decline, as even some on the left have argued. Trump represents a political disease that is spreading like an antibiotic-resistant superbug across the globe.
By any standard definition, Trump is a fascist. Trumpism, along with its international analogs, aspires to impose “the open, terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic and most imperialistic elements of finance capital,” long decried by Marxist thinkers.
Trumpism also fits the definition of fascism offered by Robert Paxton in his classic study, “The Anatomy of Fascism”:
Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.
Still unconvinced? Consider, as I’ve written before in this column, Umberto Eco’s list of the 14 common factors of fascism:
A cult of traditionalism.
The rejection of modernism.
A cult of action for its own sake and a distrust of intellectualism.
The view that disagreement or opposition is treasonous.
A fear of difference. Fascism is racist by definition.
An appeal to a frustrated middle class that is suffering from an economic crisis and feelings of humiliation and fear of the pressure exerted by lower social groups.
An obsession with the plots and machinations of the movement’s identified enemies.
A requirement that the movement’s enemies be simultaneously seen as omnipotent and weak, conniving and cowardly.
A rejection of pacifism.
Contempt for weakness.
A cult of heroism.
Hypermasculinity and homophobia.
A selective populism, relying on chauvinist definitions of “the people” that the movement claims to represent.
Heavy usage of “newspeak” and an impoverished discourse of elementary syntax and resistance to complex and critical reasoning.
Many if not all of these points will sound familiar and with good reason: Our president is a fascist, and fascists do not belong in the White House.
The reticence of some Democrats to initiate impeachment proceedings is understandable. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the moderates and center-right politicians who still control the party are correct when they argue the Senate will never convict and remove Trump. They are worried that a failed impeachment could bolster Trump’s popularity, just as impeachment improved Bill Clinton’s public standing. Still, these concerns are likely overblown, and it would appear Pelosi and her fellow centrists have drawn the wrong lessons from the Clinton saga.
While it’s true Clinton’s approval ratings increased in the aftermath of his impeachment, the effect actually was short-lived. Clinton finished his second term, but he left the Oval Office in disgrace. Republicans used the trial against Al Gore in the 2000 election, putting Clinton’s vice president on the defensive and forcing him to distance himself from his predecessor. Even accounting for the contested Florida vote tally, Gore lost to an incompetent opponent he should have trounced.
But impeachment should not be evaluated along electoral lines alone. It should be viewed at as an end in itself—the process by which the Constitution allows federal officials to hold those who have violated the public trust accountable.
Should the House vote to impeach Trump, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans will be left with two choices, neither of which is likely to boost Trump’s reelection chances. On the one hand, they could vote to dismiss the articles of impeachment lodged against Trump, which Senate rules may permit them to do. On the other, they could allow the president to be put on trial, permitting all the world to hear the evidence against him.
Either prospect scares McConnell and his minions stiff. Dismissing the case against Trump amounts to a massive cover-up while a vote of acquittal would make the Republican officials enablers of the racism and fascism that pervade the president’s administration.
The time for worrying is over. It’s time to act.
Bill Blum is a former administrative law judge and death penalty defense attorney. He is the author of three legal thrillers published by Penguin/Putnam and a contributing writer for California Lawyer Magazine. His non-fiction work has appeared in a wide variety of publications, ranging from The Nation and The Progressive to the Los Angeles Times, the L.A. Weekly and Los Angeles Magazine.
© 2020 TruthDig
Fascism, Democracy, Donald Trump, Impeach Trump, Republican Party, Mitch McConnell, Election 2020, Impeachment
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line963
|
__label__wiki
| 0.739157
| 0.739157
|
Home News $9.2m in relief equipment to be distributed
$9.2m in relief equipment to be distributed
Bavita Gopaulchan
National Security Minister Stuart Young hands over relief equipment to a member of the T&T Fire Services at the National Emergency Operations Centre in Mausica.
Around $9.2 million worth of disaster relief equipment will be distributed across eight organisations in the coming weeks. The organisations include government ministries and agencies such as the T&T Defence Force and the T&T Police Service.
At a hand-over ceremony yesterday at the National Emergency Operations Centre in Mausica, Chief Executive Officer of the Office of Disaster Preparedness and Management (ODPM), Retired Major General Rodney Smart, explained these agencies are traditionally required to collect relief equipment from its warehouse. He said while this system has its merits, it is time-consuming.
“This initiative, therefore, allows agencies to be more responsive and in a better position to relieve persons who would have suffered from the devastating effects of a hazard,” he said.
National Security Minister Stuart Young said the need for this new system came to light during the devastating floods in Greenvale in 2018 when agencies were scrambling to get resources distressed residents.
The minister said $2.4 million of the equipment, including fuel containers, full-body harnesses and hand-cranked portable generators, will be given to the Ministry of Rural Development and Local Development, while the Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries will get fire blankets, axes and containers totalling $73,000.
The health sector will get approximately $263,000 worth of equipment. In addition, regional health authorities will be provided with $345,000 in items, including walking sticks, bedpans and bio-hazard waste bags.
With the coronavirus spreading to more countries, Young assured that Government has been planning and deploying resources while taking advice from the experts.
Young said the ODPM plays a very important role in this effort while the National Security Ministry is assisting the Ministry of Health and will continue to do so through first responders.
Tobago was not forgotten as the Tobago Emergency Management Agency will receive $637,000 in relief tools.
The T&T Fire Service is set to receive the bulk of equipment such as biohazard waste bags, fire blankets, high-performance chemical suits and rescue rope ladders.
The initiative was timely, said Local Government Minister Kazim Hosein, given the level of flooding being experienced across the country in recent years.
“I can rest a little easier with the implementation of this initiative that will improve the efficiency and delivery of relief items to those affected by natural disasters,” he said.
Smart said more initiatives are in the pipeline to ensure T&T’s readiness for any eventuality. He said the agency will be meeting with volunteers on Saturday to discuss the establishment of an unmanned aerial vehicle club.
A Prepared T&T project is also expected to be launched soon with the pilot project expected to kick off in Port-of-Spain.
Previous articleJamaica intensifies measures against COVID-19
Next articlePAHO issues recommendations on use of face masks
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line965
|
__label__cc
| 0.65839
| 0.34161
|
Fire and fury? Hell no!
Donald Trump’s belligerent threats to unleash “fire and fury” against North Korea is a reckless escalation of an already dangerous situation. We need to flood the White House with calls saying: “Don’t provoke a war with North Korea. Negotiate, don’t escalate.” Call 202-456-1111between 9am-4pm EST.
If you are in the DC area, you can also join us anytime during our 24-hour emergency White House vigil from 5:00 pm today, August 6, till 6:00 pm tomorrow, August 7.
You can also sign our petition telling President Trump to send Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to North Korea for peace talks.
There is an urgent need to break the cycle of threats. U.S. military and economic pressure on North Korea, including a new round of stringent sanctions, provocative war games, and deployment of the THAAD missile system in South Korea, will not achieve peace. Instead, Trump’s threats of military intervention put the Korean Peninsula in danger of nuclear war.
Sixty percent of Americans, regardless of political affiliation, support direct negotiations between Washington and Pyongyang. Both President Moon of South Korea and Secretary of State Tillerson have called for negotiations.Tillerson recently said: “We would like to sit down and have a dialogue with them.” This is very different from the bluster of President Trump.
Diplomacy has worked to defuse the nuclear conflict in Iran. It can work in North Korea as well. Tell Donald Trump that negotiations are the only solution and he should dispatch Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to begin talks immediately. The world cannot risk a nuclear confrontation.
Call the White House, 202-456-1111, between 9am-4pm EST.
For sanity,
Ann, Ariel, Brienne, Haley, Jodie, Katie, Mariana, Mark, Mary, Medea, Nancy, Paki, Paula, Taylor and Tighe
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line968
|
__label__cc
| 0.698209
| 0.301791
|
Daily Courage - January 29
<< Daily Courage, from Open Doors USA
from Day by Day with the Persecuted Church
"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth." (John 1:14)
Remarkable Remarks - The Word of God
Josif Trifa - Romania: "A Christian without a bible is like a soldier without a gun."
Russian Christian after receiving his first Bible: "The more I read, the more I want to read."
Another Russian Christian after receiving a Bible: "I could go to prison for having this book, but this book can also set men free."
Siberian Christian who had only one page of the Bible: "I wish I knew what is on the next page."
Koran: "God forbid that He should have a son!" (Sura 4:172).
Bible: "For God so loved the world that He gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16)
William H. Houghton: "Lay hold on the Bible, until the Bible lays hold on you."
Copyright [C] 1995 Open Doors International. Used by permission.
Click here to sign up for a free monthly newsletter from Open Doors about persecuted Christians.
Day by Day with the Persecuted Church
compiled by Jan Pit with a forward by Brother Andrew (paperback, revised 2000)
Compelling wisdom from the pen of actual believers living amidst persecution, you'll be connected to the suffering, courage, and depth of life that exists in the harshest places in the world. Each of these 365 thought-provoking devotions will deepen your understanding of Christian persecution and provoke you to pray for our brothers and sisters with a new found depth.
To order your copy of this devotional, click
Read More Daily Courage, from Open Doors USA
Daily Courage - January 15 Jan 15, 2021
More Daily Courage, from Open Doors USA Articles
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line974
|
__label__wiki
| 0.967158
| 0.967158
|
LIFE INSIDE THE GREEN MONSTER
Unseen behind a scoreboard at Bostons' Fenway park, two operators post the number - by hand
By Lisa Leigh Parney Special to The Christian Science Monitor
IT sounds like a Red Sox fan's dream come true: better-than-front-row seats for every single home game.
Trouble is, the view is through a 1-by-9-inch slit.
That's the way Richard Maloney and Chris Elias see the games. They operate the manual scoreboard at Boston's Fenway Park, the one across the bottom of the Green Monster, Fenway's notorious 37-foot-high left-field wall.
"It's really a one-of-a-kind perspective," Elias says. A communications major at the University of New Hampshire, he's in his second year operating the board. "We can see everything and can even hear the outfielders positioning themselves."
He and Maloney keep track of runs, pitching changes, and scores of other league games, sliding 16-inch-high metal numbers through slots in the scoreboard wall. (The lights that indicate balls, strikes, and outs are operated from a control room behind home plate.)
The Green Monster, so named for its color and size, came into being because of the shape of the lot Fenway Park was built on in 1912. The distance to the left field fence is a relatively short 315 feet. To compensate, the monster was put in the way of any ball trying to get out of the park. Up until 1947, it was covered with advertisements.
The operators begin their workday two hours before game time. Upon arrival, Elias and Maloney check the newspaper to see who is pitching in other American League games so they can hang the pitchers' numbers on the scoreboard. The two usually have time to spare, so before a game against the Texas Rangers one day recently, Elias sat in front of the scoreboard to catch some rays. His time in the sun was cut short when the phone rang.
It was Jeff Goldenberg, the director of scoreboard operators at Fenway. The message: Get back inside.
"They aren't that strict with us, but there are guidelines we have to follow," Elias says. "We can't walk on the grass; we can't sit outside; and we can't leave once this door shuts."
Even during rain delays, they have to wait it out inside.
The only access to the Monster is from the field, through a small door that blends in with the scoreboard. Inside, two steps lead down to a long hallway, coated with a layer of dust. Graffiti covers the cement walls. Hundreds of numbered metal plates hang on the walls, and some rest on the floor.
The graffiti include thousands of signatures by players, old and new, plus "Keep this place clean," "Clemens K-20 new record 4/42/86," and "AL East Champs, 9/28/86." Maloney's and Elias's names are scribbled in at least five places.
"The walls are speaking," Goldenberg says. "It's like a little time capsule because there are so many things that are in there. Certain historical-type things happened and notes were made on the walls of those events."
Surrounded by the history of the board and being within steps of the game would thrill any baseball fan, but after spending a couple seasons in the scoreboard, "the novelty kind of wears on you," Maloney says. "It gets depressing in here."
Maloney graduated from Boston College this year. "The team kind of dictates the job," he says. "If they are winning, it's a lot more fun. It's less exciting when they are losing." (The Sox are currently in fifth place.)
Elias says sitting in the Monster for three hours or more is difficult sometimes. "When it's a good day, it's hard to be in here because you want to sit out there in the sun and interact with the fans. It's a lot easier to be in here when it's a rainy day."
The temperature in the Monster is regulated by the weather outside.
"It really doesn't get hot in here, but if it has been hot outside for a few days, it will heat up in here because of the metal scoreboard," Maloney says. "There's no heater back here, so in the early and late months of the season, you really have to bundle up, because it gets so cold."
When boredom strikes, Elias and Maloney take turns watching the game. They may watch the game on television, read the newspaper, or answer the phone. Last year, the two had a baseball-throwing contest to liven up things, dangling a light bulb from a pipe and trying to hit it.
"This is a low-stress job," Elias says, and you need something to keep things exciting. "But there are times when it gets a little hectic in here, when there are other games going on. We have to keep up with the pitchers' numbers and the scores."
"One person can work this, but that's when you go out of your mind," Maloney says.
Mistakes are rare, but they do happen.
"Last year, I put up a zero in the ninth inning and it was only the eighth," Maloney says. "Every now and then you'll put up a wrong number, then Jeff [Goldenberg] will call down and let us know about it. We watch the electronic scoreboard most of the time so we know what's going on."
Despite the job's dull moments, Maloney said there are perks, too.
"It's great talking to the players because they don't see you as a pestering fan," Maloney says. "I know [Oakland Athletics pitcher] Ron Darling's brother, so we had something in common. It's great coming to Fenway."
But after the final pitch is thrown, Elias says, "We're all smiles when we get out."
Fenway Park: Living link to baseball's past turns 100
At Boston’s Fenway Park, a different Green Monster
Airbnb is offering a room at Boston's Fenway Park: What's the catch?
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line976
|
__label__wiki
| 0.697841
| 0.697841
|
By Jef Scoville Frank Scheck, and David Sterritt
Lucy Kaplansky - Flesh and Bone (Red House Records): It's the quietest moments that speak the loudest on Lucy Kaplansky's new album. While her natural twang suits her well for the occasional foray into country - and even the rocking cover of Richard Thompson's "Don't Renege on Our Love" is successful - somehow the placidity of "Still Life," "This Is Mine," and "Edges" is more satisfying. And when John Gorka joins her on "If You Could See," the result is modern folk at its best.
- Jef Scoville
Bill Evans Trio - Turn Out the Stars/ Bill Evans Trio - Letter to Evan (Dreyfus Jazz): These historically important releases document the final live recordings of influential pianist Bill Evans, recorded at the jazz club Ronnie Scott's in London 16 years ago. Playing with Marc Johnson (bass) and Joe LaBarbera (drums), Evans performs a mixture of standards ("But Beautiful," "Stella by Starlight") and original compositions ("Laurie," "Two Lonely People") that demonstrate his unique harmonic approach and his amazing ability for hard bop rhythm. These sets capture the pianist at his most swinging and exuberant; just listen to his hard-driving take on "My Romance."
- Frank Scheck
Dmitri Shostakovich - Orchestral Works (Sony): One of the greatest of all Soviet composers was attacked by his own government for "formalist" tendencies, which simply meant his works were fresh and original enough to require a bit of attention. The joke was on the critics, of course, since much of his music is hugely accessible and entertaining. This collection is a splendid showcase for the populist side of his personality. Selections range from the First Symphony and the Festive Overture to a lot of galumphing dance music, including the irresistible Polka from the "Age of Gold" ballet. Eugene Ormandy and Andr Kostelanetz lead the orchestras.
- David Sterritt
Marian McPartland, jazz legend, dies
13-year-old jazz pianist Joey Alexander goes back to the Grammys
Top Picks: A radio show about visual design, Wagner's Ring Cycle, and more
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line977
|
__label__cc
| 0.723129
| 0.276871
|
About CFS
Our Team of Professionals
Our Corporate Profile
CPFS In The News
Until early 2018, stocks were enjoying their longest period without a five percent pullback in nearly 90 years.1,2 But in early February, that calm came to a sudden and decisive end, as the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index fell more than six percent during the first three trading days of the month.
By February 8, stocks had fallen more than 10 percent from their January highs, leaving many investors to wonder how things could change so fast. Days later, sentiment had shifted yet again and stocks trended higher.3
The sudden return of volatility has been attributed to a range of factors. Here are four to consider.
1. Inflation Fears
The January employment report (released on February 2nd) showed an increase in long-stagnant wage growth, creating fears of accelerating inflation and higher interest rates.4 Inflation is a rise in overall prices, which reduces the purchasing value of money.
Amplifying the economic issues was concern over American fiscal policy. The recent tax cuts have sparked worries that the “fiscal stimulus“ may prove inflationary, which also may put upward pressure on interest rates.
Yield on the 10-year Treasury bond spiked to 2.88 percent on February 8, hitting its highest level in four years.5,6 While higher yields are not necessarily bad for stock prices, they do represent competition for investors’ dollars. In other words, some investors may be tempted to pull money out of stocks to invest in bonds.
2. Algorithmic Trading
Algorithmic trading is a type of investment involving certain triggers to buy or sell stocks, using computers to make large trades very quickly. It has been estimated that algorithmic trading is responsible for about half of all the daily activity in the S&P 500 Index.7
The triggers for “pushing the button“ on buy or sell programs can be many, but market watchers say some sell programs were activated when 10-year Treasury yield approached 3 percent.8 This may have triggered other automated strategies, which accelerated the downward move and contributed to the market’s subsequent rally.
3. The End of Easy Money
The drop in prices also may be tied to the end of monetary easing. The U.S. Federal Reserve (along with other major global central banks) pursued a policy of low interest rates through quantitative easing in recent years. Quantitative easing occurs when central banks work to lower interest rates in an attempt to spur economic growth. While the Federal Reserve announced the end of quantitative easing last fall, the markets may just be feeling the ramifications of the end of the stimulus program.9
4. Natural Market Cycles
Market corrections are a natural part of the investing cycle. Since the end of World War II, there have been 76 corrections of 5 to 10 percent, 26 pullbacks of 10 to 20 percent, eight retreats of 20 to 40 percent and three drawdowns greater than 40 percent.10 A long-range view can be comforting, as you remember that fluctuations have happened many times before.
Market movements in coming weeks are impossible to predict, though continued volatility is likely. Your investment portfolio should reflect your goals, time horizon and risk tolerance. Now is a great time to remember why you invested, stay the course, and avoid overreactions.
Stocks are represented by the S&P 500 Composite index, which is an unmanaged index that is considered representative of the overall U.S. stock market. Index performance is not indicative of the past performance of a particular investment. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Individuals cannot invest directly in an index. The return and principal value of stock prices will fluctuate as market conditions change. And shares, when sold, may be worth more or less than their original cost.
Investing involves risks, and investment decisions should be based on your own goals, time horizon and tolerance for risk. The return and principal value of investments will fluctuate as market conditions change. When sold, investments may be worth more or less than their original cost. The opinions expressed and material provided are for general information and should not be considered a solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security. Any companies or stock indexes mentioned are for illustrative purposes only. It should not be considered a solicitation for the purchase or sale of the securities.
The Wall Street Journal, February 2, 2018
The market value of a bond will fluctuate with changes in interest rates. As rates rise, the value of existing bonds typically falls. If an investor sells a bond before maturity, it may be worth more or less that the initial purchase price. By holding a bond to maturity an investor will receive the interest payments due plus your original principal, barring default by the issuer. Investments seeking to achieve higher yields also involve a higher degree of risk.
BBC.com, February 6, 2018
Reuters, September 19, 2017
U.S. News & World Report, February 5, 2018
Global and International Funds
Investors seeking world investments can choose between global and international funds. What's the difference?
It's important to understand how inflation is reported and how it can affect investments.
Custer Financial Services
406 Science Drive
InfoCFS@LFG.com
Securities: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin
Insurance: Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, North Carolina, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wisconsin
Betty Custer: California Insurance License #0B45502
Unless otherwise identified, registered associates on this website are registered representatives of Lincoln Financial Advisors Corp. Securities and investment advisory services offered through Lincoln Financial Advisors Corp., a broker/dealer (member SIPC) and a registered investment advisor. Insurance offered through Lincoln affiliates and other fine companies and state variations thereof. Lincoln Financial Group is the marketing name for Lincoln National Corporation and its affiliates. Firm disclosure information available at www.LFG.com. *Associated persons of Lincoln Financial Advisors Corp. who hold a JD and/or CPA license do not offer tax or legal advice on behalf of the firm.
Custer Financial Services is not an affiliate of Lincoln Financial Advisors Corp.
CRN-3244255-091620
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line979
|
__label__wiki
| 0.845478
| 0.845478
|
Emiliano Zapata and the Mexican revolution
Written by Neil Faulkner
Published in A Marxist History of The World
Revolutionary campesinos on the move
Neil Faulkner looks at the rise and fall of Zapatismo: revolution from below by the common people of the countryside
The distance from Mexico City to Cuernavaca, the state capital of Morelos, is less than 40 miles. But to make the journey in 1914 was to pass from one social universe to another. Mexico City was controlled by a liberal bourgeoisie of landowners, businessmen, and politicians. Cuernavaca was controlled by the Zapatistas.
All the men in Cuernavaca were wearing the white pyjamas, sombreros, and sandals of Mexico’s working people. They all looked alike. It was impossible to tell who were jefes (chiefs) and who followers. Everyone spoke the plain language of the pueblo (village). Virtually all were of pure-blooded Indian descent. Few could read or write.
The town, in short, was controlled by revolutionary campesinos (peasant-farmers). The rich had fled. The leader of the campesinos was a small farmer turned guerrilla commander called Emiliano Zapata.
Zapata personified the revolution of the Mexican campesinos. He never entirely transcended the naivety and parochialism of the pueblo. He hated the city and distrusted men in suits and shoes. ‘They’re all a bunch of bastards,’ he said of the self-serving politicians of Mexico’s governing elite. So he shunned Mexico City, national politics, and attempts to suborn him with offers of high office.
Personally incorruptible, he remained loyal through a decade of revolution to the cause of the campesinos. In return, the poor of southern Mexico idolised him. When an old woman in an isolated village was asked what she thought of him, she answered, ‘us poor mountain Indians go along hanging on tight to the tail of chief Zapata’s horse’.
The touchstone of Zapata’s politics and the agrarian revolution he led was the Plan of Ayala. Clause 6 demanded the restoration of the fields, timber, and water which had been taken from the pueblos by the rich, Clause 7 that one-third of all large estates be seized and redistributed to the landless, and Clause 8 that the entire property of counter-revolutionaries be nationalised and two-thirds of the proceeds be used to pay war pensions and indemnities to the poor.
The Plan of Ayala was a response to betrayal – the betrayal of the revolutionary hope in which many poor men had joined an armed struggle against the dictatorship of Porfirio Diaz in 1910.
When the revolution began, Mexico was dominated by a landowning elite of Spanish colonial descent. Politics was a matter of self-serving cliques, and elections were decided by backroom deals and ballot rigging. Whatever happened, the owners of the haciendas (big estates) continued to rule.
This did not mean nothing changed in Mexico; it simply meant change always benefitted the same people. Things were in fact changing. Global demand for Mexico’s primary exports was rising, especially from the mid 1890s, and hacienda-owners were cashing in, expanding their estates, digging irrigation works, and installing new milling machines.
Standing in the way of profit was the pueblo. But the hacienda-owners had money, and the state was corrupt. They could easily get their way by hiring their own gangsters and by bribing local police and magistrates. The villagers would go to town to defend their ancient claims, and the courts would spew them back as garbage.
This was the Mexico of the Diaz dictatorship. But the regime – that of a self-interested faction grouped around an ageing autocrat – was too exclusive and unbending. When Francisco Madero, a liberal politician, challenged the Diaz dictatorship in 1910, he garnered widespread middle-class support. More importantly, when Diaz resisted, the villages exploded.
Once in power, however, Madero asked the guerrillas to disarm. He then reneged on his promises of land reform. When the campesinos protested, the countryside was flooded with armed police and federal soldiers. The class war in the Mexican countryside quickly resumed.
The central contradiction in Mexican society was that between hacienda and pueblo, between Spanish landowner and Indian peasant, between the few who were rich and the many who were not. The difference between conservative supporters of Diaz and liberal supporters of Madero was secondary.
Conservatives generally in Latin America backed dictators, were close to the Army and the Church, and drew their support mainly from more traditional sections of the ruling class like the older landowning families. Liberals favoured parliamentary government, wanted greater independence from foreign influence (especially that of the US), and drew support from business interests and the middle class.
But conservatives and liberals had far more in common than divided them: they were two wings of a single property-owning elite of Spanish descent. That is why the liberals turned on the campesinos as soon as they had got rid of Diaz.
The principal jefe in the north was the former social bandit Pancho Villa. A social bandit is an outlaw who preys on the rich and enjoys the support of the common people from whom he has sprung. In periods of crisis, social banditry can swell into an agrarian revolutionary movement, transforming a figure like Pancho Villa into a national leader.
But Villa was politically unsophisticated and somewhat opportunist. Though he never broke with the campesinos of northern Mexico, neither did he provide clear and consistent revolutionary leadership.
Zapata quickly became the principal jefe in the south. A small farmer himself, he was more firmly rooted in the pueblos than Villa, and his politics were a more faithful reflection of the aspirations of the rural poor for land, water, and security.
The resistance of Villa, Zapata, and other popular chiefs paralysed the state apparatus across much of rural Mexico, leaving its police and troops holed up in the major towns, with the surrounding countryside in rebel hands.
History then repeated itself on a higher level. Madero was murdered by one of his own generals, Victoriano Huerta, but another liberal politician, Venustiano Carranza, quickly formed a ‘Constitutionalist’ army to renew the alliance with the peasantry and resume the struggle against dictatorship.
The peasant armies of Villa and Zapata entered Mexico City in 1914. But instead of taking state power, they handed control back to the liberal bourgeoisie.
Zapata’s embodiment of the agrarian-social revolution of the Mexican pueblos was too complete. He hated the rich and the liberals. He grew wise from long experience of lies and betrayals. The Plan of Ayala exudes bitterness. It denounces Madero for his attempt ‘with the brute force of bayonets to shut up and to drown in blood the pueblos that ask, solicit, or demand from him the fulfilment of the promises of the revolution’.
Yet, in November 1914, at the moment of his greatest power, Zapata handed state authority to Carranza’s Constitutionalists, the liberal successors of Madero. Zapata was content to retire to Morelos and act as guardian of its local agrarian revolution.
Unable to imagine, let alone work to achieve, a democratic state of workers and peasants, Zapata allowed the space he and his followers had prised open at the top of Mexican society to be reoccupied by the class enemies of the pueblo. Sooner or later, when preparations were complete and the moment judged right, these enemies would counterattack to eradicate the dangerous example of Zapatismo: revolution from below by the common people of the countryside.
It took them six years. They campaigned in the north in alliance with US troops from across the border, and they soon had Villa on the run. Though guerrilla resistance continued, the northern revolutionary movement never really recovered. Villa was eventually murdered in July 1923.
The resistance in the south was more entrenched. But by the end, such was the devastation and depopulation that the Zapatista revolution was reduced to little more than dwindling guerrilla bands.
Even then, the old ‘band of brothers’ of southern revolutionary chiefs formed in 1910 held together. Some accepted amnesty, but none turned on their former comrades still in the field. And the common people, spurning rewards and threats, continued to give support to the fugitive rebels.
Zapata himself was tricked, walked into a trap, and was gunned down in April 1919. ‘Zapata having disappeared, Zapatismo has died,’ proclaimed the government commander in Morelos. ‘Zapata was simply a gangster.’
It was not quite so simple. The Zapatista chiefs formed an alliance with Alvaro Obregon and again entered Mexico City as part of a victorious army in 1920. Carranza was overthrown and assassinated. This time, determined to retain power, the liberals left the pueblos of Morelos alone. It was enough the Zapata was dead and Mexico as a whole had been made safe for capitalism.
To win, a revolution must advance, drawing ever more of the masses into the struggle, seizing state power when this becomes possible, then using this as a lever to extend the gains of the revolution and to spread it internationally. To stop, on the other hand, let along to retreat, is to allow one’s class enemies the opportunity to regroup, gather strength, and prepare a counter-attack.
The extraordinary resilience of the Zapatistas through ten years of revolution resulted in lasting gains for the people of the pueblos. But their parochialism – their belief that it was enough to make revolution in their own villages – doomed their wider vision of a world permanently and radically transformed.
The struggle to free Palestine - Timeline with John Rees
The Iraq Inquiry - Timeline with John Rees
Peasant movements and political agency
Obama and US power - Timeline with John Rees
The first decade of the new century - Timeline with John Rees
Tagged under: History
Neil Faulkner is a freelance archaeologist and historian. He works as a writer, lecturer, excavator, and occasional broadcaster. His books include ‘A Visitor’s Guide to the Ancient Olympics‘ and ‘A Marxist History of the World: from Neanderthals to Neoliberals‘.
The agony of Gaza
Yes: The Radical Case for Scottish Independence
WWI: Imperial carve up, industrialised killing the truth about Gove's 'Great War'
The Great Flood
Jeremy Paxman's BBC history of the First World War is shallow, banal, and cliché-ridden
Final Solutions: Human nature, Capitalism, and Genocide
World War One and the rehabilitation of slaughter
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line982
|
__label__cc
| 0.712371
| 0.287629
|
Saint Meinrad Archabbey Library Gallery: St. Meinrad, an exhibit of wall hangings 'Healing the Earth' by artist Joanne Weis, through Feb. 28. The exhibit is free. Weis will give a gallery talk Saturday at 10 a.m. For library hours, call 812-357-6401 or 800-987-7311, or visit saintmeinrad.edu/library/hours/.
Teaching from the Book of Revelation: 11 a.m. every Sunday until completion at Church of God of Prophecy, 3407 Bellemeade Ave. Speaker is Bishop William Gaddis (free). Call 812-459-2359.
The Mighty Acts of God in Zion: The Storyline of the Bible: 7-8 p.m. on Tuesdays in the fellowship hall of St. Ananias Orthodox, 4411 Washington Ave.
Old Friendship Church Celebrate Recovery Program: 7 p.m. on Fridays at Oak Hill Christian Center, 4901 Oak Hill Road.
Traditional Roman Catholic Latin Mass: 3 p.m. every Sunday at St. Paul's Chapel, 629 E. Louisiana St.
Choir Day: 3:30 p.m. Feb. 14 at McFarland Missionary Baptist Church, 750 Lincoln Ave.
St. Anthony Catholic Church Buffet Breakfast: 8 a.m. to noon Sunday in the school cafeteria. Cost is $7.
Lenten Fish Fries: 4:30-7 p.m. Fridays through March 18 at Nativity Catholic Church, 3635 Pollack Ave. Menu includes fried catfish or baked tilapia dinners. Call 812-476-7186.
St. James Fish Dinners: 4:30-7:30 p.m. Friday, Feb. 26 and March 11 at St. James Church Madden Hall, Old Princeton Road, Haubstadt. Menu will consist of fried or baked fish, German potato salad, applesauce, cornbread, dessert, coffee and tea. Carryouts will be available in the old cafeteria.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line983
|
__label__wiki
| 0.786673
| 0.786673
|
Steven Seagal: Man, Myth, Lunatic
Tell Us Now: How Does Hollywood Misrepresent Your Job?
If Steven Seagal were as good at fighting as he is at being physically incapable of backing up even 1 percent of his claims, we would all be wearing the illustrious Lord Seagal's mandatory plus-size kimonos. Thankfully, he's dragged his legendary reputation of being an arrogant jerk out of America -- probably for good, since it wasn't so long ago that he was granted Russian citizenship by Vladimir Putin himself, which means Phase 2 of Putin's master plan to destroy the United States is well underway. Now Seagal can only gripe about kneeling football players and get into weird spats with elderly boxers turned grilling moguls from the safety of the Russian wastes. The feet he's stomped into fictional criminals to nourish the rich soils of patriotism will instead spout flowers beneath each step he takes on the snowy streets of Moscow.
The man with the fighting style of a convulsing marionette trying to brush cracker crumbs off the face of a second convulsing marionette will be missed stateside, but thanks to humanity's enduring fascination with the opinions of irrelevant people, the near-constant lies he's been telling about himself since he got famous in the late 1980s will never go away. These lies run so deep that they can be found at the very root of Seagal's identity.
At first glance, I couldn't tell you Seagal's ethnicity, but he looks like the kind of guy who's been banned from a local Denny's. He claims to be Italian, when the only Italian in him are the flecks of salami clinging to his goatee. He also has a history of telling people he's Asian. I bet whenever he wants to give friends a sampling of his traditional culture, he takes them to Panda Express, since he's basically a living version of Panda Express' disdain for the food they serve.
Seagal is neither Italian nor Asian. His paternal grandparents were Russian Jews, and his mother was Irish with German, English, and Dutch ancestry. Though none of that can dissuade me from believing he's a sentient collection of novelty display knives with dragon handles. If he ever killed someone, I'm sure he'd flee to a Benihana thinking it gave him the same immunity as a Japanese Embassy.
If you're feeling a little heartbroken that your hero would lie about who he is as a person, take heart in knowing that he also lies about how much of a creative genius he is. A Vanity Fair profile of Seagal includes a moment which proves that while he might be a conceited jerk, at least he's... no, no that's all it proved:
One day an executive walked into Seagal's trailer and found Hollywood's reigning manly man ... Weeping. "Oh, I'm reading this script," Seagal explained, still misty. 'It's the most incredible script I've ever read.
"That's fantastic," the executive said, "Who wrote it?"
Seagal didn't miss a beat. "I did," he replied.
Some say that on quiet nights, when the Santa Ana winds are blowing through Southern California, you can still hear that executive's laugh. And if you listen closely, you can also hear his death rattle. Steven Seagal has never been in on the joke of Steven Seagal, the way Chuck Norris kind of is with his tepid embrace of Chuck Norris Facts. Seagal has that blend of self-delusion and pretension which renders introspection impossible. That explains why he once wrote a script about AIDS which led to him explaining to studio executives that AIDS was created by the CIA to "eradicate blacks and gays."
More than anything, I want to read the script for Steven Seagal Slap-Fights AIDS. Knowing the formula for all his movies from his peak, there was probably an evil AIDS baron in a cowboy hat who gets a cut of the profits whenever the disease kills opponents of the Straight White American Male Agenda, so Seagal uses his martial arts skills to kill him with a shotgun before he can pour barrels of liquid AIDS into an inner-city water supply. Also, his partner and/or girlfriend was killed. Not by AIDS, though. Probably by a gun or something.
Speaking of which, for a supposed martial arts expert, Seagal spends most of his movies shooting people at point-blank range. That raises the question of whether or not he's actually good at martial arts. The internet tells me he has a number of black belts, so maybe he's good. I don't know. What do people who actually use their martial arts for a living think of him? Let's ask MMA legend Anderson Silva and his team of trainers as they make fun of Seagal's fighting style:
Seagal has twice claimed to have taught UFC fighters the moves they used in victories, including the front kick Silva used to retain his middleweight title at UFC 126. He's reached the point where he's so physically useless he just watches people do stuff and claims he taught them that. He is America's (now Russia's) delusional lying grandpa, if grandpas were mostly known for refusing to shut up about aikido. His inability to back up his absurd claims were challenged the time he said he couldn't be choked out while in the presence of Gene Lebell, one of MMA's forefathers. So Lebell put Seagal in a rear naked choke hold. Seagal proceeded to pass out and supposedly poop himself. He's great at karate chops, is what I'm saying.
Seagal spends most of the time desperately trying to convince people that he's so much cooler than his ponytail lets on. That's why in a 1988 interview with The Los Angeles Times, he just casually mentioned that in addition to teaching the best fighters in the world everything they know, he was also an adviser for several CIA field agents during his years in Japan. Because of course the star of Hard To Kill would be.
"You can say that I became an adviser to several CIA agents in the field, and through my friends in the CIA, met many powerful people and did special works and special favors."
The CIA is not in the business of confirming or denying these kinds of things, but it's Steven Seagal, so they made an exception. What's the worst that could happen? He squints and sulks away into the void of his cavernous black button-ups? They called his claims "improbable," and his own wife at the time flat-out said he'd never had anything to do with the CIA. But none of that stopped him from claiming that his 1988 movie Above The Law, about rogue CIA agents, was partially autobiographical.
By now, I have well established that every time Seagal speaks in public, he's testing people to see if they know what to do when a senile old man has wandered too far from his nursing home. But none of what I showed you so far is anywhere near as wonderful as an anecdote he casually dropped into a 2001 interview with PETA.
Seagal is a fabricator of hysterical lies, obviously. But more than that, he's an environmentalist and animal rights activist.
Interviewer: In your travels, have you had any special interactions with animals?
Seagal: I was in Japan and I had my own dojo, or school, there. I was having some difficulties with a group of lawless individuals -- there was this big conflict. I remember I was sitting out in front of my dojo and I saw this white dog who just walked right up to me as if he had known me forever. I petted him and fed him. He stayed with me for a few days. On about the third day, he woke me up with really intense barking at about four in the morning. I noticed that my dojo was on fire. I quickly summoned help, and we got the fire out, and I thanked the dog. The next day, he disappeared.
Steven Seagal was warned of an impending fire set by local gangbangers by a mystical wandering dog that repays debts for displays of kindness and vanishes when its job is done. This might be the most believable lie he's told so far. The interviewer, summoning a strength people usually only tap into to lift SUVs off of babies, somehow resisted the urge to give Seagal a bewildered stare for 25 minutes.
Interviewer: What would you say to people who say animals are here for us to use?
Seagal: I had a foreman once who said that, and he didn't last long. He was supposed to be looking after my animals. I just don't feel that way. I think we're here to take care of each other. The more people commune with animals and relate to animals, the better off we'll all be. There are stories about people who have gone into comas or have had strokes being brought back to health through communion with animals. What does that tell you?
I want to make fun of him so bad, but maybe I'm the deluded jerk here. I looked into this, and there is a report from a legit source which renders me unable to claim animals have never woken people from comas. In this story from earlier in 2017, a guy slipped into what doctors suspected would be a week-long coma. But it ended after only four days when coma guy's dog started barking in his hospital room. Is it the same dog that saved Steven Seagal's dojo from a fiery demise? Yes, of course is it. Absolutely. I've never been more confident about anything in my life. But I can't find anything other than that one story that happened nearly 17 years after he claimed that animals are a the number one doctor-recommended treatment for comas.
The only record of this PETA interview is cut off before the interview ends, and it's a tragedy:
Interviewer: If relationships with animals can heal us, doesn't that tell you that they're quite special?
I can't stop thinking about how he might have answered that. Would he have told of the donkey that dragged him off the beaches of Normandy on D-Day? The owl that fought by his side as he defended the mean streets of Harlem from vampiric crack fiends? Maybe I'm hyping it up too much. Having read dozens of his interviews, I've noticed there's always a point about five or seven questions in when he starts answering in monosyllables, thinking it'll speed things up so he can get back to reapplying his hairline with a Sharpie.
In my quest to find his response to that final question, I came across this gorgeous Steven Seagal fansite which seems to be mostly focused on his movie On Deadly Ground. It looks and sounds like a GeoCities page that somehow avoided extinction. That particular page has a few interviews and words from Seagal on the subjects of nature conservation and animal protection. It has exactly as much of the PETA interview as the cached version. So I guess the rest of the interview has been lost to time. But the page also has the text of an "Earth Day Letter" Seagal wrote on behalf of the National Wildlife Federation which perfectly sums up the way he has woven his unique brand of terrible martial arts action stardom with his genuine passion for environmentalism and his warped sense of grandeur.
He opens the letter with:
Being an action hero means fighting a lot of important battles.
The fight to protect the Earth is one we can't afford to lose.
If you've seen me in On Deadly Ground or Fire Down Below, you know I'm not a "Johnny-Come-Lately" to the environmental movement. I re-wrote those scripts hoping I could make the world a better place and bring people's awareness about the environment to a higher level.
He chose to raise awareness about the environment by killing seven people in Fire Down Below and 40 in On Deadly Ground. The only time Steven Seagal can communicate with the world without making things up is when he's murdering polluters. When Putin gets sick of him after he claims he was a founding member of the Jackson 5, he can ship him back over here. We'll give him a pair of brass knuckles and make him the head of the EPA.
Luis worries he may not be worthy of a visit by the magic dog. You can find him on Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook.
If you loved this article and want more content like this, support our site with a visit to our Contribution Page. Please and thank you.
Catch a faceful of funny Thursday, October 19, at The Cracked Stand Up Show hosted by Alex Schmidt and featuring Soren Bowie, Eddie Della Siepe, Joel Samataro, Riley Silverman, and Barbara Gray. Get your tickets here.
For more check out The 7 Most Mismatched Final Fights in Movie History and 5 Actors Who Do the Exact Same Thing in Every Movie.
Subscribe to our YouTube and check out 6 Most One-Sided Fights In Movie History, and watch other videos you won't see on the site!
Also follow our new Pictofacts Facebook page. Just click it.
5 Movie Shoots That Fell Into Death Threats And Madness
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line985
|
__label__wiki
| 0.670023
| 0.670023
|
Commentary: Retrofitting San Juan Generation Station for carbon capture is an uneconomic pipe dream
Dennis Wamsted and Karl Cates
Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis
The business template behind a proposal to turn the San Juan Generating Station into a model carbon-capture project doesn’t hold up under much scrutiny.
On paper, it’s an elegant, almost magical idea. It would retrofit an aging and increasingly uncompetitive coal-fired power plant with whiz-bang technology that would trap its carbon dioxide emissions and sell them to producers in the oil industry. The project, which would cost north of $1 billion, supposedly would be paid for by investors who would recover their capital through federal tax credits.
Under the plan, San Juan would remain open, while longtime and good-paying jobs in San Juan County would be preserved and the tax base it supports would be spared the hit it otherwise will suffer under existing plans to close the plant by 2022.
The pitch, however, is built on false assumptions, as we’ve described in research we’ve published over the past several months. The promoter, a novice and untried energy company called Enchant Energy, appears so far to be enriching only itself with federal money it has been given to study the idea. In the meantime, it is creating false hope through a partnership with Farmington Electric Utility System by sustaining the myth that coal-fired power generation can survive in this day and age.
Electricity-generation modernization is sweeping the country as cheap fracked gas and zero-fuel-cost renewables like utility-scale wind and solar continue to gain market share. The trend has gained irreversible momentum and it leaves plants like San Juan in an impossible position.
San Juan isn’t alone. Coal-fired plants all across American are closing as utilities shift to more economic forms of power production. Regionally the shift is starkly evident. The only other two coal-fired plants in New Mexico are headed for decommissioning too. Four Corners Power Plant, just across the San Juan River, will close by 2031, seven years ahead of its original retirement date, if not sooner. Escalante Station, near Grants, will close this year, as part of an abrupt reversal in business strategy announced just last month by Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, which is also accelerating the closure of its coal plants in Colorado.
The same thing is happening across the state line in Arizona, where Navajo Generating Station, once the biggest electricity plant west of the Mississippi, closed in November, and where Arizona’s remaining coal-fired plants—Cholla, Coronado, Springerville, and Apache—are now either scheduled for early retirement or are underperforming at a level that suggests they won’t be able to make a go of it as long as originally envisioned when they were built.
Enchant claims its proposal for San Juan would reverse this tide, but the plan is riddled with so many holes that in truth it is more a work of aspiration than anything resembling reality.
Our most recent report on it highlights three wildly optimistic assumptions made by Enchant that call the entire project into question:
• First, that the retrofitted units will operate at an average capacity factor of at least 85% for the first 12 years it is operational—a performance level not achieved at the plant in the past 10 years and one highly unlikely to be reached in the future;
• Second, that the plant will capture 90% of its carbon dioxide, while operating at least 85% of the time for 12 consecutive years—another long-shot outcome; and
• Third, that the plant will be able to sell six million metric tons of CO2 annually for use in enhanced oil recovery activities in the Permian Basin in order to pay for the project—an equally iffy proposition.
All of this is technically possibly, as researchers at Los Alamos National Laboratory have pointed out. But there is a huge gap between what is technically possible in a paper assessment and what is likely during actual commercial operations. It is technically possible that your lottery ticket will win the jackpot, too. The likelihood of that outcome, however, is, to understate the obvious, unlikely.
It is perfectly understandable for any community going through what Farmington is experiencing to reach for solutions that are within reason. But Enchant’s proposal does not fall into that category. Rather, its plan cobbles together projections that defy common sense and conventional commercial practices.
Enchant’s quixotic endeavor also raises serious risks for the citizens of Farmington and the surrounding area. There is little tying Enchant’s backers to the region; if the plant founders they can wash their hands and move on—leaving the local community holding the bag.
The people of Farmington and San Juan County would be far better served investing in the new energy economy, which is revolving more and more around proven, clean and increasingly low-cost technologies that are practical and saleable.
The future of power generation is not in coal-fired power of any kind, but in the development of readily available resources like the sun, which northwestern New Mexico has in abundance
Dennis Wamsted and Karl Cates are analysts at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line989
|
__label__wiki
| 0.995044
| 0.995044
|
A comic spin on the end of the world
Erinn Hayes, left, Blaise Miller, Julia Stiles, David Cross, America Ferrera and Jeff Grace in a scene from "It's a Disaster." This summer, a handful of films led by Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg's "This Is the End," are putting a humorous twist on the well-worn genre of the world ending.
Updated 6/12/2013 12:08 PM
NEW YORK -- The Earth has been coming to an end with comic frequency. We've seen tsunamis sweep the oceans ("2012"), the world freeze over ("The Day After Tomorrow") and a rogue planet bear down ("Melancholia"). So many have been patrolling a desolate Earth -- Will Smith ("After Earth"), Tom Cruise ("Oblivion"), a cute cleanup robot ("WALL-E") -- that even the post-apocalyptic world is getting crowded.
But now, months after the Mayans predicted the end of the world, comedians are having the last laugh -- or at least, a Last Days laugh. In Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg's "This Is the End," which opened Wednesday, the rapture arrives in the midst of a Hollywood party at James Franco's house.
"The World's End" is coming in August and earlier this year, there was "It's a Disaster," where nuclear calamity interrupts a New Orleans couples' brunch. Also just out is the farcical "Rapture-Palooza," in which Craig Robinson (a star of "This Is the End") plays the devil incarnate. Last year, "Seeking a Friend for the End of the World," with Steve Carell and Keira Knightley, put a romantic comedy twist on the world's end.
The movies are particularly fitting if you consider that, ultimately, all comedy is laughing in the face of death. If tragedy plus time equals comedy, the End of Days (a fiery demise followed by eternity) supplies plenty for both parts of the equation.
"We always say the worse off the characters are, the funnier it generally is," says Rogen. "And there's no situation much worse than this."
In "This Is the End," easily the funniest and highest profile release of the bunch, the cast (including Jonah Hill, Danny McBride and Michael Cera) play warped and exaggerated versions of themselves. When Los Angeles goes up in flames, they bicker selfishly among themselves over dwindling supplies, cattily referring to each other's movies. Cabin fever leads to betrayal.
"We wanted to take the people who were the least prepared to deal with something like this and put them in this situation," says Goldberg, the co-writer with Rogen of "Superbad" and "Pineapple Express." "And the least skilled humans on Earth, arguably, are actors. Seth and I always talk about how he learned how to cook chicken for the movie 'Take This Waltz.' I'd rather be with an electrician or a carpenter or a hunter."
Ironically, comedies like "This Is the End" actually feel more personal than the majority of actual disaster films, where spectacle often dwarfs humans. Todd Berger, writer and director of "It's a Disaster," was inspired to make his film -- a social satire of self-obsessed 30-somethings -- after talking to his sister, a nurse, about her experience in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina.
"I asked her: 'So was it like a disaster movie?"' says Berger. "She was like, 'No. Some people were freaking out, but you can only freak out for so long. Some people eventually started reading magazines."'
Says Berger: "Not everyone is going to respond to a disaster like Sylvester Stallone in 'Daylight."'
There are, of course, other movies to satirize the end of the world, most notably Stanley Kubrick's 1964 classic black comedy about Cold War nuclear fallout, "Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb."
For many, zombie movies are their own genre separate of apocalyptic films, but Edgar Wright's 2004 comedy "Shaun of the Dead" remains a central touchstone for doomsday laughs. In the film, one revered by Rogen and Goldberg, Simon Pegg stars as a protagonist reacting with British understatement to marauding zombies.
"We definitely don't see ourselves as parodists at all because we genuinely love these movies," says Wright. "If anything, it's exactly the opposite: that we're almost like frustrated serious genre filmmakers who can't do it any other way."
Wright and Pegg's next film, "The World's End," to be released Aug. 23, has been lumped into the trend of comedic apocalypses. In it, middle-aged friends reunite for a pub crawl in their hometown, a journey to conclude at a pub called The World's End. Along the way, the townspeople are revealed to be robots that take after '50s and '60s science fiction like "Village of the Damned" or "Body Snatchers."
"It's this thing of laughing in the face of death," says Wright, explaining that the refusal of Pegg's character to grow up plays a significant role in their predicament. "He's a character who's trouble for his friends on a social level and also, eventually, on a galactic level."
A similar spirit of both celebrating and contorting genre motivates Goldberg and Rogen. Goldberg recalls an inspirational meeting with screenwriter and eventual "Iron Man 3" director Shane Black to discuss their script for "The Green Hornet," which aimed to be a funnier superhero film.
"He told us: 'You guys take things and you flip it on its head.' We hadn't done it enough with the 'Green Hornet' yet. And he told us we needed to do it more. Shane Black's one of our idols, so we really took it to heart. We realized: This is what we do and do well. We're just attracted to big, crazy things. We love aliens and the end of the world and things exploding. We just like it big."
"We're just generally reactionary filmmakers, in a way," says Rogen. "We do try to do our version of what people are doing. The more of them there is, the more we want to try to do what we consider to be a good version of it."
The pair acknowledge they've long considered doing their take on a space adventure. Next, though, they'll turn to another genre: the political thriller. Rogen says the film, currently titled "The Interview," is their version of Ben Affleck's "Argo" -- "a political thriller with idiots."
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line991
|
__label__cc
| 0.659848
| 0.340152
|
Home » R&D News
R&D News
Philadelphia-based David Michael & Co., a supplier of flavors, stabilizers and natural colors, and SPI Polyols Inc., New Castle, Del., a manufacturer and supplier of specialty polyols, have announced a partnership to promote the use of Maltisweet IC Maltitol Syrup for no-sugar-added and reduced-sugar ice cream applications.
All American Foods Inc., Mankato, Minn., has announced its acquisition of Forester Foods Inc., Lake Forest, Ill. All American Foods manufactures and markets its ProMix line of food ingredients, which are used in frozen desserts and processed cheeses. Forester Foods marketed its food ingredients utilized primarily by the frozen dessert industry.
Marking the 50th anniversary of the Joint Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization Committee on Food Additives, Richard Cantrill, technical director of the Champaign, Ill.-based American Oil Chemists’ Society, received a medal for his contributions to the committee. JECFA is an independent international expert scientific committee, which performs risk assessments and provides advice to the FAO and WHO, and is administered jointly by the groups and their countries.
Roquette America Inc., Keokuk, Iowa, is expanding its polyols capabilities by adding mannitol to its U.S manufacturing facilities already producing maltitol, sorbitol and other new products, to meet continued growth needs of the healthy food and pharmaceutical markets. Roquette’s Smart Calories solutions and healthy ingredients portfolio targets the next-generation development of future market trends to meet the demands of emerging consumer needs.
Main Street Ingredients, a manufacturer and supplier of functional food ingredients based in La Crosse, Wis., has acquired Hilton House Foods Inc., Wichita, Kan. Hilton House Foods, owned by Plaza Belmont LLC, Kansas City, Mo., manufactures specialty products for the ice cream industry. Main Street Ingredients will continue to produce at the manufacturing plant in Wichita until it transitions production to its facility in La Crosse.
Consuming lowfat dairy products may help lower blood pressure and improve heart health, according to a study published recently in the Journal of the American Heart Association. Participants who consumed three or more servings of dairy foods a day had significantly lower blood pressure than those who consumed less than half a serving a day. The study found that consuming dairy is inversely related with systolic blood pressure, a key predictor of cardiovascular disease. AHA also recently released its 2006 Diet and Lifestyle recommendations, which reinforced the benefits of the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) — a plan that includes lowfat and fat-free milk and milk products.
$OMN_arttitle="R&D News";?>
R&D News
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line992
|
__label__wiki
| 0.630679
| 0.630679
|
Nationwide organizations, like the National Institutes of Health and the American Association of Dental Student Research, award funding for a variety of research projects. Funding opportunities from foundations and bio-tech companies are available projectively and periodically. Travel awards, fellowships and research grants are awarded to graduate students and post-graduate residents from a number of other sources. In addition, the Office of Institutional Advancement at the school of dentistry provides information about scholarships and awards for student researchers. Aside from the opportunities listed here, national meetings often offer travel awards to students wishing to present research. Funding opportunities are periodically updated as new information becomes available.
National Institutes of Health Funding
The Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards for Individual Predoctoral Fellows (F31) are available for Ph.D. students. https://www.nidcr.nih.gov/careers-training/graduate-students
NIH Graduate Partnership Program. https://www.training.nih.gov/programs/gpp
NIH Postbaccalaureate Intramural Research Training Award. https://www.training.nih.gov/programs/postbac_irta
NIH Training Programs in Biomedical Research. https://www.training.nih.gov/programs
National Institute of Dental Research & Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)
NIDCR Grants and Funding. http://www.nidcr.nih.gov/grantsandfunding/
NIDCR Fellowship in Dental Public Health. https://www.nidcr.nih.gov/careers-training/dentists-physicians-fellowship-dental-public-health
Dental Clinical Research Fellows Training Program. https://www.nidcr.nih.gov/careers-training/dentists-physicians/clinical-research-fellowship
Physician Based Research Network. https://www.nidcr.nih.gov/research/clinical-trials/national-dental-practice-based-research-network
National Center for Dental Hygiene Research & Practice (dhnet) – Funding. https://dent-web10.usc.edu/dhnet/research.asp?section=2&category=19
American Dental Association Resources (ADA). http://www.ada.org/en/science-research/health-policy-institute/
National Center for Dental Hygiene Research & Practice (dhnet). https://dent-web10.usc.edu/dhnet/research.asp?section-2&category=19
AADR/IADR Student Research Fellowship. http://www.iadr.org/AADR/Awards/Student-Fellowships/SRF
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA). http://www.hrsa.gov/grants/index.html
National Science Foundation Funding http://www.nsf.gov/funding/
Research.gov – Online grants management for the NSF Community. http://www.research.gov/
Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Funding. http://www.cdc.gov/funding
Food & Drug Administration (FDA) Grant Opportunities. http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/business/ucm119348.htm
Pan American Health Organization. http://www.paho.org/hq/
Indian Public Health Services Program.http://www.ihs.gov/
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Grants. http://www.rwjf.org/en/grants.html#q/maptype/grants/ll/37.91,-96.38/z/4
Commissioned Corps. https://intrahr.od.nih.gov/policyguidance/corps/default.htm
ADEA Scholarships, Awards and Fellowships - offers student scholarships, awards for educators and funding opportunities for various fellowships. http://www.adea.org/Secondary.aspx?id=11606
Short-term training for DDS or DDS/PhD students
The Howard Hughes Medical Institute Research Scholars Program requires one year away from dental school curriculum. http://www.hhmi.org/grants/office/graduate/
The American Association of Dental Research Student Research Fellowship is available for DDS or DDS/PhD students; deadline is January. http://www.iadr.org/AADR/Awards/Student-Fellowships/SRF
The Clinical Research Training Program offers a one-year research fellowship at the National Institutes of Health, with an optional second year. https://clinicalcenter.nih.gov/training/index.html
University of Maryland School of Dentistry graduate awards
The Graduate Student Research Association Research Grant provides $1,000 toward research expenses, based on financial need and merit. https://graduate.umaryland.edu/gsa/Awards/Professional-Development-Award/
Summer research training programs
University of Maryland School of Dentistry Summer Research Training Program. Click here for more information.
The National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research Summer Dental Student Award. https://www.nidcr.nih.gov/careers-training/nidcr-summer-dental-student-award
NIH Summer Internship Program. https://www.training.nih.gov/programs/sip
Underrepresented minorities and need-based awards
UNCF/Merck Graduate Science Research Dissertation Fellowships are given to a dozen African American science graduate students. The awards include a stipend of up to $42,000 and a research grant of up to $10,000. Research projects must be one to three years in length; deadline is December. http://www.uncf.org/merck/programs/grad.htm
The Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology gives several travel awards. http://www.sicb.org/membership/awards.php3#fgst
Students in the Summer Research Training Program are awarded travel grants to the American Dental Association Annual Session and the Hinman Student Research Symposium.
The Office of Institutional Advancement can provide information on a number of different scholarships and awards. Learn more.
Other UMB Research Resources & Services
Research Connection: provided by the HS/HSL, this is a comprehensive suite of programs and services designed to advance the success of UMB faculty, staff and students. http://www.hshsl.umaryland.edu/services/researchconnection.cfm
Research Resources in Dentistry. http://guides.hshsl.umaryland.edu/dentistry/research
Research Funding (also listed above). http://guides.hshsl.umaryland.edu/researchfunding
UMB’s Research & Development website. http://www.umaryland.edu/ord/
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line998
|
__label__wiki
| 0.981691
| 0.981691
|
Kansas cites slavery case in abortion brief, backpedals
Roxana Hegeman
Wichita, Kan. — Kansas’ attorney general withdrew on Wednesday a court brief that cites the slavery-era Dred Scott decision to support the state’s position that the Kansas Constitution does not guarantee a right to an abortion.
The reference made in a filing submitted to the Kansas Supreme Court a day earlier does not accurately reflect the state’s position, is not necessary for its legal argument and should not have been made, Attorney General Derek Schmidt said in a statement.
“Neither the State nor its attorneys believe or were arguing that Dred Scott was correctly decided,” he said. “Nonetheless, the reference to that case was obviously inappropriate, and as soon as I became aware of it today, I ordered the State’s brief withdrawn.”
In the infamous Dred Scott decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled a black person whose ancestors were sold as slaves could not be a U.S. citizen and therefore had no right to sue. It also ruled in the decision that the federal government could not prohibit slavery in its territories.
“It is a very odd thing, an unusual thing to have people relying on Dred Scott in support of a legal position that was espoused in Dred Scott,” said Richard Levy, a law professor at the University of Kansas.
The state cited the 1857 decision as the Kansas Supreme Court considers whether the state’s constitution guarantees the right to an abortion. The appeal stems from the refusal of the Kansas Court of Appeals to implement the state’s first-in-the-nation ban on a common second-trimester abortion method.
In a split decision, the Court of Appeals said the Kansas Constitution protects abortion rights independently from the U.S. Constitution. If upheld, the ruling would allow state courts to protect a woman’s right to end her pregnancy beyond federal court rulings.
“The unfortunate use of this citation should not distract from the important question the Kansas Supreme Court faces in this case: Whether the Kansas Constitution establishes a state-level right to abortion,” Schmidt said. “The State will continue to argue vigorously that it does not.”
The state used the Dred Scott case to bolster its argument that the Declaration of Independence had no legally binding effect.
Kansas cited the decision in response to an amicus brief filed by the American Civil Liberties Union in support of abortion rights.
Doug Bonney, chief counsel for the ACLU’s Kansas chapter, told The Wichita Eagle that the state’s decision to cite the Dred Scott decision was unusual.
“When I saw the table of cases, when I just started scrolling through it, I thought, ‘What? Really?” Bonney said.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1001
|
__label__cc
| 0.687448
| 0.312552
|
EDHEC MSc in Climate Change & Sustainable Finance: Training a new generation of finance experts
Lionel Martellini, Professor of Finance and Director of the EDHEC-Risk Institute, has co-designed EDHEC’s new joint master’s programme with leading engineering school MINES ParisTech – the MSc in Climate Change & Sustainable Finance. Here, he shares some of his insights.
Written on 05 January 2021.
You helped design the curriculum of the new MSc in Climate Change & Sustainable Finance. What are the programme’s main highlights? What makes it unique?
What is unique about this programme is that it will introduce the science and engineering aspects of climate change, while exploring its economic implications and the financial instruments and techniques that can be used in the context of ever-evolving climate policies. The specific areas to be covered include the use of capital markets to create market-based emissions trading systems; venture capital to develop low-emissions technologies; project finance to build cleantech energy projects; corporate finance to embed climate change and related regulatory risks in the valuation of securities; climate risk assessment and disclosure for corporations and their impact on credit analysis; the impact of climate risks and policies on investment decisions; and the design of investment strategies to hedge climate risks and liabilities.
This programme is specifically designed for students with an undergraduate degree in business management or financial economics, or with an undergraduate degree in science or engineering, or a related field. It is also highly relevant for young graduates in engineering or finance who want to acquire the skillset they need to have a successful career in sustainable investing.
Why now? And why has EDHEC partnered with MINES ParisTech, an engineering school?
Financial decisions around the world are increasingly influenced by the scarcity of resources and the climate. The extent of the environmental impact from climate change is still uncertain, but recent scientific evidence is increasingly worrisome, and most governments are taking decisive steps to avert a climate catastrophe. As Mark Carney, former Governor of the Bank of England and Chair of the Financial Stability Board, so eloquently put it, “Climate change is the Tragedy of the Horizon. We don’t need an army of actuaries to tell us that the catastrophic impacts of climate change will be felt beyond the traditional horizons of most actors – imposing a cost on future generations that the current generation has no direct incentive to fix.”
Dealing with this ‘tragedy of the horizon’ and facilitating the transition to a low-carbon economy requires a broad array of new financial instruments and innovations that will have far-reaching implications for markets, corporations, intermediaries and investors, if we are to ensure that long-term capital is committed to addressing long-term environmental needs. It also requires a new breed of financial professional with the skill and appetite to enhance financial analysis with deep understanding of environmental, social and governance factors. The key challenge in training this new generation of financial expert is the fact that dealing with climate-change finance requires a truly interdisciplinary perspective, which is rare in a curriculum taught either by a business school or an engineering school.
This is why we are extremely pleased to join forces with MINES ParisTech, one of France’s leading engineering schools, to launch this joint MSc in Climate Change and Sustainable Finance. It enables us to draw on the combined faculty expertise of the two institutions, as well as the research of two leading research centres, the Centre for Applied Mathematics at MINES ParisTech and EDHEC-Risk Institute.
Is sustainable finance at the heart of EDHEC’s research and teaching?
EDHEC Business School’s commitment to climate finance is multidimensional, spanning research, education, and outreach.
In terms of research, and as part of our effort to help investors and asset managers deal with these new risk factors, EDHEC-Risk Institute has launched an ambitious programme that will explore the impact of climate change on asset prices and examine the measurement and management of climate-related risks in investors’ portfolios. On 9 June 2020, EDHEC Business School joined the Global Research Alliance for Sustainable Finance and Investment (GRASFI), the global network for cutting-edge research on sustainable finance and investment, underscoring EDHEC's commitment in this area.
In terms of education, we have been introducing climate finance courses at both first- and second-year master’s level, ensuring that any student graduating in finance from EDHEC has a decent understanding of these issues. We are also currently preparing an online certificate programme on the subject, which will be launched on Coursera platform.
Lastly, in terms of outreach, EDHEC is organising an annual event, the EDHEC Climate Finance Conference, which will combine academic lectures and panel discussions on topics such as the efficiency of market pricing of climatic risks; climate risk assessment and disclosure for corporations and their impact on credit analysis; the effect of climate risks and policies on financial management decisions; the design of investment strategies to hedge climate risks and liabilities; and the impact of green quantitative easing policies by central banks.
How is the jobs market in sustainable finance? What can be expected from the financial industry?
The financial industry is already taking decisive steps to reducing the carbon footprint of its investment portfolios to help contain the rise in global mean temperatures to well below 2° C above pre- industrial levels, per the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change. Climate change is a formidable threat and challenge facing the human race. It is also an opportunity to make the financial industry useful again and an opportunity for our students to make use of their skills and expertise, with a wealth of exciting job opportunities in climate finance. There is strong growth in market demand for financial specialists who can combine non-financial risk factors into risk analysis and investment decision-making. Beyond climate-finance job opportunities, however, most traditional finance positions will require an understanding and awareness of the financial and economic implications of climate change. In this context, our joint MSc programme aims to train a new breed of financial professionals that combine financial expertise with a healthy understanding of the scientific and engineering challenges associated with the transition to a low-carbon economy.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1009
|
__label__cc
| 0.650189
| 0.349811
|
Index of Quotes 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
I don't want people buying my records for this summer's hit. I want people buying them because they're interested in what Ministry will have to say in the future.
Al Jourgensen
buy record ministry
Change image and share on social
I don't want people confusing what it is that I'm about. I just stand there and sing. And I don't do stunts or anything. if I wanted to do all that, I don't think I'd get away with it.
want people confuse
I don't want people ever to think I'm not in advertising. It's such a business of enthusiasm that if you're not totally excited about it, you should leave it.
Jerry Della Femina
excite business leave
I don't want people following Jon Kabat-Zinn. I want them following themselves.
jon zinn kabat
I don't want people in China to have deep pockets but shallow minds.
deep people china
I don't want people instructing me what to do with my body; I don't want the government to tell me what I can do in my bedroom, with my body, or with whoever I choose to love.
Tyne Daly
government people body
I don't want people kissing my butt. If I had a bad show and I know it, don't tell me I had a good show. I hate that. I guess because I'm 17, people think I don't see stuff like that.
kiss butt guess
I don't want people losing respect for me as a player. I want to go out in every game and perform to the highest level. I have no retirement plans. I've had a lot of injuries but I want to continue playing.
have lot level
I don't want people poking around in my private stuff. They've no business in it. My work is what I give to people, that's my job, and that's where it stops.
have business stuff
I don't want people thinking they know me instead of the character. Steve McQueen has loads of stories about him - who knows what's true? But it's great for people to fictionalize rather than know the truth.
fictionalize great truth
Contact us / Send quote
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1013
|
__label__wiki
| 0.913533
| 0.913533
|
Amy Adams Might Win an Oscar This Year. The Question Is: For Which Film?
She's courting acclaim at TIFF with Arrival and Nocturnal Animals.
By Stephen Marche
J. CountessGetty Images
I don't really want to have an argument about whether Amy Adams is the greatest actress of her generation. As far as I can see, there's not really much to debate at this point. She can do and has done anything and everything—broad comedy, kids' movies, ensemble pieces, superhero films—and has been better than everybody else in them. Her five Oscar nominations show her range in the prestige category: Junebug, Doubt, The Fighter, The Master, and American Hustle. She's not particularly interesting as a celebrity, which may be why she's had to wait for so long to be recognized for her talent. Nobody cares when she goes to a party. Nobody cares what she wears on red carpets. But she is more or less invisible as a public personality exactly because she is such a great actress. Her soul is malleable. She can become whom she likes.
The Academy loves to snub great actors—look at Robert Redford, who won his only Oscar for directing Ordinary People (his win over Martin Scorsese for Raging Bull remains controversial three decades later)—but this year I think they may find it hard to do it again with Adams. She has two films on offer—Denis Villeneuve's Arrival, a more interesting version of last year's The Martian, and Nocturnal Animals, Tom Ford's meditation on being rich and bored. She is utterly superb in both. The question is not whether Adams deserves an Oscar—the question is: for which film?
Amy Adams is more or less invisible as a public personality exactly because she is such a great actress. Her soul is malleable. She can become whom she likes.
In Nocturnal Animals, Adams plays Susan--a distracted Los Angeles art dealer with too much money and a great deal of anxiety over whether she will have too much money in the near future. Susan reads a great deal. The plot of Nocturnal Animals, such as it is, alternates between her difficult marriage and a novel written by her ex-husband, also called Nocturnal Animals. The novel is a vaguely Western story about a man whose wife and daughter are murdered during a trip through West Texas.
Amy Adams and Tom Ford attend the premiere of
Franco OrigliaGetty Images
Director Tom Ford is many things, but one thing he is not is a storyteller. The script for Nocturnal Animals would not survive a first-year seminar at any random film school. But that's not the point. Nocturnal Animals isn't really a film. It's more like a feature-length perfume ad. A beautiful woman walks up a set of stairs and then vanishes and then appears at the top of the stairs—that sort of thing, but for 116 minutes. I half-expected "Nocturnal Animals: Available at Nordstrom" to appear on the screen.
And yet Adams is terrific in this movie. Unforgettable even. Even when she's crying in scenes that are just plain silly, you believe her. She has nothing interesting to say in this movie, but she says those nothings in the most interesting way imaginable. Adams is entering—yes, I'm going to say it—Meryl Streep territory. She can take films that you would otherwise never want to see and make them required viewing.
With Arrival, Adams is given actual material to work with, and the results are glorious. This is the movie you're going to be taking everybody to see in November to recover from the election. Adams plays a linguist who is confronted by the arrival of an alien species and has to figure out how to communicate with them. The aliens are "heptapods," giant spider-like things with seven legs who write in huge, slightly differentiated circles. It's an oddly intellectual movie for a sci-fi thriller, but watching Adams figure out this language is like reading a riddle with narrative drive. Her communication of intellectual curiosity is the key to the film.
These two films in tandem make this season the best ever for Adams. Whether she will win an Oscar is impossible to say, of course, since the Academy Awards pretty much always makes the wrong choice. I doubt for her that there will be a sudden burst of recognition as with Matthew McConaughey and the McConaissance. She hasn't really had a bad or embarrassing period in her career to recover from. For a decade now, she had been appearing in a steadily accruing collection of better and better films. There is no grand story here except the story of a working actress improving. And so yet again she makes a terrible celebrity—bland and decent Amy Adams, just about perfect in anything.
Stephen Marche Stephen Marche is a novelist who writes a monthly column for Esquire magazine about culture.
An Open Letter to Amy Adams
Watch the Final Nocturnal Animals Trailer
Watch the First 'Nocturnal Animals' Teaser Trailer
Toronto Film Fest Best-Dressed
First Look at Oscar Season:24 Contenders from Toronto
Emmys 2016 Preview: Which Shows Will Win
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1016
|
__label__wiki
| 0.884073
| 0.884073
|
Dov Tiefenbach
DecemberDec 8, 1981
DecemberDec 8, 1981 (age 39)
First Name Dov#3
Notable for his work on both stage and screen, he starred on Broadway in A Thousand Clowns and received a Leo Award for his supporting role in the 2002 film Flower & Garnet.
He acted in his first television commercial when he was just twelve years old. The following year, he appeared in the 1990s television series RoboCop.
Aside from his work as an actor, he fronted a pop band called Theresa's Sound-World.
He spent his early years in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and later relocated to Los Angeles, California.
He and John Cho were both in the cast of the 2004 comedy movie Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle.
Dov Tiefenbach Popularity
Dov Tiefenbach Is A Member Of
Movie Actors
First Name Dov
Dov Tiefenbach Fans Also Viewed
More December 8 Birthdays
December 8 Birthdays
More Sagittarius
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1019
|
__label__cc
| 0.733392
| 0.266608
|
Annexes to COM(2016)411 - Jurisdiction, the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, and on international child abduction (recast) - EU monitor
Annexes to COM(2016)411 - Jurisdiction, the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, and on international child abduction (recast) - Main contents
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
COM(2016)411 - Jurisdiction, the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental ...
COM(2016)411
ANNEX I
CERTIFICATE TO BE ISSUED BY THE COURT FOLLOWING A DECISION REFUSING THE RETURN OF A CHILD TO ANOTHER MEMBER STATE BASED SOLELY ON POINT (B) OF ARTICLE 13(1), OR ON ARTICLE 13(2), OR BOTH, OF THE 1980 HAGUE CONVENTION (1)
(Article 29(2) of Council Regulation (EU) No 2019/1111 (2))
Information for the persons receiving this certificate for the purposes of Article 29(5) of the Regulation
If on the date of the decision refusing the return of the child, indicated in point 3, no proceedings on the substance of rights of custody are pending yet in the Member State where the child was habitually resident immediately before the wrongful removal or retention, you have the possibility to seise a court in that State with an application regarding the substance of rights of custody in accordance with Article 29(5) of the Regulation.
If the court is seised within three months of the notification of the decision refusing the return of the child, any decision resulting from those proceedings regarding the substance of rights of custody which entails the return of the child to that Member State will be enforceable in any other Member State in accordance with Article 29(6) of the Regulation, without any special procedure being required and without any possibility of opposing its recognition unless and to the extent that irreconcilability with a decision referred to in Article 50 of the Regulation is found to exist, provided that a certificate in accordance with Article 47 has been issued for the decision. If the court is seised after the three months have expired, or the conditions for issuing a certificate in accordance with Article 47 of the Regulation are not met, the resulting decision regarding the substance of rights of custody will be recognised and enforced in other Member States in accordance with Section 1 of Chapter IV of the Regulation.
The party seising the court of the Member State where the child was habitually resident immediately before the wrongful removal or retention shall submit to that court the following documents:
(a) a copy of the decision refusing the return of the child;
(b) this certificate; and
(c) where applicable, a transcript, summary or minutes of the hearing as indicated in point 4.1.
Information for the court receiving this certificate for the purposes of Article 29(3) of the Regulation (3)
This certificate was issued because the child(ren) indicated in point 5 was (were) wrongfully removed to, or retained in, the Member State of the court issuing this certificate. Proceedings for the return of the child(ren) pursuant to the 1980 Hague Convention were brought because the person indicated in point 6.1 claimed that the child(ren)’s removal or retention was in breach of rights of custody and at the time of removal or retention those rights were actually exercised, either jointly or alone, or would have been so exercised but for the removal or retention according to the 1980 Hague Convention. This court has refused the return of one or more of the children subject to the proceedings based solely on point (b) of Article 13(1), or Article 13(2), or both, of the 1980 Hague Convention.
Where proceedings on the substance of rights of custody are already pending in the Member State where the child was habitually resident immediately before the wrongful removal or retention at the time that this court gave its decision indicated in point 3 which refuses the return of a child based solely on point (b) of Article 13(1), or Article 13(2), or both, of the 1980 Hague Convention, Article 29(3) of the Regulation provides that this court, if it is aware of those proceedings, shall, within one month of the date of its decision, transmit to the court seised with proceedings on the substance of rights of custody, either directly or through the Central Authorities, the following documents:
(a) a copy of its decision refusing the return of the child;
(c) where applicable, a transcript, summary or minutes of the hearing as indicated in point 4.1 and any other documents this court considers relevant as indicated in point 4.2.
The court seised of proceedings on the substance of rights of custody may, where necessary, require a party to provide a translation or transliteration, in accordance with Article 91 of the Regulation, of the decision and any other document attached to this certificate (Article 29(4) of the Regulation).
1. MEMBER STATE OF ORIGIN OF THE DECISION REFUSING THE RETURN OF THE CHILD(REN)* (4)
Belgium (BE) Bulgaria (BG) Czechia (CZ) Germany (DE)
Estonia (EE) Ireland (IE) Greece (EL) Spain (ES)
France (FR) Croatia (HR) Italy (IT) Cyprus (CY)
Latvia (LV) Lithuania (LT) Luxembourg (LU) Hungary (HU)
Malta (MT) Netherlands (NL) Austria (AT) Poland (PL)
Portugal (PT) Romania (RO) Slovenia (SI) Slovakia (SK)
Finland (FI) Sweden (SE) United Kingdom (UK)
2. COURT WHICH GAVE THE DECISION AND IS ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE*
2.1. Name*
2.2. Address*
2.3. Tel./fax/e-mail*
3. DECISION*
3.1. Date (dd/mm/yyyy)*
3.2. Reference number*
4. ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS (WHICH MAY BE SHARED WITH THE PARTIES)*
4.1. A transcript, summary or minutes of the hearing*
4.1.1. Yes
4.1.2. No
4.2. Any other documents the court considers relevant* (5)
4.2.1. Yes (please specify)
5. CHILD(REN) (6) NOT TO BE RETURNED ACCORDING TO THE DECISION*
5.1. Child 1*
5.1.1. Surname(s)*
5.1.2. Given name(s)*
5.1.3. Date of birth (dd/mm/yyyy)*
5.1.4. Place of birth (if available)
5.1.5. Identity number or social security number (if applicable and available)
5.2. Child 2
5.2.1. Surname(s)
5.2.2. Given name(s)
5.2.3. Date of birth (dd/mm/yyyy)
6. PERSONS (7) CONCERNED BY THE RETURN PROCEEDINGS*
6.1. Person seeking the return of the child(ren)*
6.1.1. Natural person
6.1.1.1. Surname(s)
6.1.1.2. Given name(s)
6.1.1.3. Date of birth (dd/mm/yyyy)
6.1.1.4. Place of birth (if available)
6.1.1.5. Identity number or social security number (if applicable and available)
6.1.1.6. Address (if available)
6.1.1.6.1. as stated in the decision …
6.1.1.6.2. any additional information (for example, concerning a different current address) …
6.1.2. Legal person, institution or other body
6.1.2.1. Full name
6.1.2.2. Identification number (if applicable and available)
6.2. Respondent*
7. THE DECISION REFUSING THE RETURN OF THE CHILD(REN) (8) TO ANOTHER MEMBER STATE IS BASED SOLELY ON ONE, OR BOTH, OF THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS*
7.1.1. Point (b) of Article 13(1) of the 1980 Hague Convention
7.1.2. Article 13(2) of the 1980 Hague Convention
8. AT THE DATE OF THE DECISION INDICATED UNDER POINT 3, PROCEEDINGS ON THE SUBSTANCE OF RIGHTS OF CUSTODY ARE ALREADY PENDING IN THE MEMBER STATE WHERE THE CHILD(REN) WAS (WERE) HABITUALLY RESIDENT IMMEDIATELY BEFORE THE WRONGFUL REMOVAL OR RETENTION*
8.1. No
8.2. Not known to the court
8.3. Yes
8.3.1. Court seised of proceedings on the substance of rights of custody
8.3.1.1. Name
8.3.1.3. Tel./fax/e-mail (if available)
8.3.2. Reference number (if available)
8.3.3. Party 1 (9)
8.3.3.1. Natural person
8.3.3.1.1. Surname(s)
8.3.3.1.2. Given name(s)
8.3.3.2. Legal person, institution or other body
8.3.3.2.1. Full name
8.3.4. Party 2
8.3.5. Child(ren) (10) concerned as indicated in point 5:
8.3.5.1. Child 1
9. THE DECISION REFUSING THE RETURN OF THE CHILD(REN) HAS BEEN NOTIFIED AS FOLLOWS TO*
9.1. Person 1 as indicated in point 6.1*
9.1.2. Not known to the court
9.1.3.1. Date of notification (dd/mm/yyyy)
9.1.3.2. The decision was notified in the following language(s):
BG ES CS DE ET EL EN FR
GA HR IT LV LT HU MT NL
PL PT RO SK SL FI SV
10. FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES: MEASURES HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO ENSURE CONTACT BETWEEN THE CHILD(REN) AND THE PERSON SEEKING THE RETURN OF THE CHILD(REN) PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 27(2) OF THE REGULATION*
10.1. No
10.2. Yes
10.2.1. If yes, please attach a copy or summary of the decision.
If additional pages have been attached, please state the number of pages: …
Done at …, date (dd/mm/yyyy)
Signature and/or stamp
(1) Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction ('the 1980 Hague Convention').
(2) Council Regulation (EU) No 2019/1111 of 25 June 2019 on jurisdiction, the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, and on international child abduction (OJ L 178, 2.7.2019, p. 1) ('the Regulation').
(3) Where the party initiates proceedings on the substance of rights of custody in accordance with Article 29(5) of the Regulation in the Member State where the child(ren) was (were) habitually resident immediately before the wrongful removal or retention after this court gave its decision indicated in point 3, please see the section 'Information for the persons receiving this certificate for the purposes of Article 29(5) of the Regulation'.
(4) Fields marked with (*) are mandatory fields.
(5) To be filled in only for the purposes of Article 29(3) of the Regulation.
(6) If more than three children are concerned, please attach an additional sheet.
(7) If more than two persons are concerned, please attach an additional sheet.
(9) If more than two parties are concerned, please attach an additional sheet.
(10) If more than three children are concerned, please attach an additional sheet.
ANNEX II
CERTIFICATE CONCERNING DECISIONS IN MATRIMONIAL MATTERS
(Point (a) of Article 36(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1111 (1))
To be issued, upon application by a party, with regard to a decision granting divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment, by the court of a Member State of origin as communicated to the Commission pursuant to Article 103 of the Regulation.
1. MEMBER STATE OF ORIGIN* (2)
2. COURT ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE*
3. COURT WHICH GAVE THE DECISION (if different)
3.1. Name
3.2. Address
4.3. Type of decision*
4.3.1. Divorce
4.3.2. Marriage annulment
4.3.3. Legal separation
5. MARRIAGE*
5.1. Spouses*
5.1.1.1. Surname(s)*
5.1.1.2. Given name(s)*
5.1.1.3. Date of birth (dd/mm/yyyy)*
5.1.1.4. Place of birth
5.1.2.5. Identity number or social security number (if applicable and available
5.2. Date, country and place of marriage*
5.2.1. Date (dd/mm/yyyy)*
5.2.2. Country*
5.2.3. Place (if available)
6. THE DECISION WAS GIVEN IN DEFAULT OF APPEARANCE*
6.2.1. Party in default of appearance as indicated in point … (please fill in)
6.2.2. That party was served with the document which instituted the proceedings or with an equivalent document.
6.2.2.1. No
6.2.2.2. Not known to the court
6.2.2.3. Yes
6.2.2.3.1. Date of service (dd/mm/yyyy)
7. THE DECISION IS SUBJECT TO FURTHER APPEAL UNDER THE LAW OF THE MEMBER STATE OF ORIGIN*
8. DATE OF LEGAL EFFECT IN THE MEMBER STATE WHERE THE DECISION WAS GIVEN (dd/mm/yyyy)*
9. NAME(S) OF PARTY(IES) WHO BENEFITED FROM LEGAL AID IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 74(1) OF THE REGULATION
9.1. Party(ies)
9.1.1. as indicated in point 5.1.1
10. COSTS AND EXPENSES OF THE PROCEEDINGS (3)
10.1. The decision also covers matters of parental responsibility, and the information on costs relating to the proceedings under this Regulation is provided solely in the certificate concerning decisions in matters of parental responsibility.
10.2. The decision provides that (4)
… (surname(s))
… (given name(s))
must pay to
the sum of …
Euro (EUR) Bulgarian lev (BGN) Croatian kuna (HRK)
Czech koruna (CZK) Hungarian forint (HUF) Polish zloty (PLN)
Pound sterling (GBP) Romanian leu (RON) Swedish krona (SEK)
Other (please specify (ISO code)):
10.3. Any additional information which might be relevant (for example, fixed amount or percentage; interests awarded; shared costs; where more than one party has been ordered to bear the costs, whether the whole amount may be collected from any one of them): …
(3) This point also covers situations where the costs are awarded in a separate decision. The mere fact that the amount of the costs has not been fixed yet should not prevent the court from issuing the certificate if a party wishes to seek recognition of the substantive part of the decision.
(4) If more than one party has been ordered to bear the costs, please attach an additional sheet.
ANNEX III
CERTIFICATE CONCERNING DECISIONS IN MATTERS OF PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY
(Point (b) of Article 36(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1111 (1))
To be issued, upon application by a party, with regard to a decision in matters of parental responsibility, by the court of a Member State of origin as communicated to the Commission pursuant to Article 103 of the Regulation.
5. CHILD(REN) (3) COVERED BY THE DECISION*
6. RIGHTS OF CUSTODY (4)
6.1. Rights of custody attributed according to the decision (5)
6.2. Attributed to the following party(ies) (6)
6.2.1.1.3. Date of birth (dd/mm/yyyy)
6.2.1.1.4. Place of birth (if available)
6.2.1.1.5. Identity number or social security number (if applicable and available)
6.2.1.1.6. Address (if available)
6.2.1.1.6.1. as stated in the decision …
6.2.1.1.6.2. any additional information (for example, concerning a different current address) …
6.2.1.2.2. Identification number (if applicable and available)
6.3. The decision entails the handover of the child(ren)
6.3.2.1. Details of the handover relevant for enforcement if not already indicated in point 6.1 (for example, to whom, which child(ren), periodical or single handover)
7. RIGHTS OF ACCESS
7.1. Rights of access granted by the decision (7)
7.2. Granted to the following party(ies) (8)
7.2.2.4. Place of birth (where available)
8. OTHER RIGHTS IN MATTERS OF PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY
8.1. Right(s) attributed according to the decision (9)
8.2. Attributed to the following party(ies) (10)
9. THE DECISION ORDERS (A) PROVISIONAL, INCLUDING PROTECTIVE, MEASURE(S)*
9.2.1. Description of the measure(s) ordered (11)
10. THE DECISION IS SUBJECT TO FURTHER APPEAL UNDER THE LAW OF THE MEMBER STATE OF ORIGIN*
11. THE DECISION IS ENFORCEABLE IN THE MEMBER STATE OF ORIGIN*
11.1. Concerning rights of custody as indicated in point 6
11.1.1. No
11.1.1.1. The decision does not contain an enforceable obligation (if applicable).
11.1.2. Yes, without any restrictions (please indicate the date (dd/mm/yyyy) on which the decision became enforceable): …/…/……
11.1.3. Yes, but only against the party (12) as indicated in point … (please fill in)
11.1.3.1. Please indicate the date (dd/mm/yyyy) on which the decision became enforceable against this party: …/…/……
11.1.4. Yes, but limited to the following part(s) of the decision (please specify) …
11.1.4.1. Please indicate the date (dd/mm/yyyy) on which this (these) part(s) of the decision became enforceable: …/…/……
11.2. Concerning rights of access as indicated in point 7
11.3. Concerning other rights in matters of parental responsibility as indicated in point 8
12. AS OF THE DATE OF ISSUANCE OF THIS CERTIFICATE, THE DECISION HAS BEEN SERVED UPON THE PARTY(IES) (15) AGAINST WHOM ENFORCEMENT IS SOUGHT*
12.1. Upon the party as indicated in point … (please fill in)
12.1.2. Not known to the court
12.1.3. Yes
12.1.3.1. Date of service (dd/mm/yyyy)
12.1.3.2. The decision was served in the following language(s):
BG ES CS DE ET
EL EN FR GA HR
IT LV LT HU MT
NL PL PT RO SK
SL FI SV
13. THE DECISION WAS GIVEN IN DEFAULT OF APPEARANCE*
13.2.1. Party(ies) in default of appearance (16) as indicated in point … (please fill in)
13.2.2. That party was served with the document which instituted the proceedings or with an equivalent document.
13.2.2.1. No
13.2.2.2. Not known to the court
13.2.2.3. Yes
13.2.2.3.1. Date of service (dd/mm/yyyy)
14. THE CHILD(REN) (17) AS INDICATED IN POINT 5 WAS (WERE) CAPABLE OF FORMING HIS OR HER (THEIR) OWN VIEWS*
14.1. Child as indicated in point 5.1
14.1.1. Yes (then please fill in point 15)
15. THE CHILD(REN) CAPABLE OF FORMING HIS OR HER (THEIR) OWN VIEWS AS INDICATED IN POINT 14 WAS (WERE) GIVEN A GENUINE AND EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS HIS OR HER (THEIR) VIEWS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 21 OF THE REGULATION
15.1.2. No, for the following reasons: …
16. NAME(S) OF PARTY(IES) (18) WHO BENEFITED FROM LEGAL AID IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 74(1) OF THE REGULATION
16.1. Party(ies)
16.1.1. as indicated in point … (please fill in)
17. COSTS AND EXPENSES OF THE PROCEEDINGS (19)
17.1. The decision also covers matrimonial matters, and the information on costs relating to the proceedings under this Regulation is provided solely in this certificate.
17.2. The decision provides that (20)
(1) Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1111 of 25 June 2019 on jurisdiction, the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, and on international child abduction (OJ L 178, 2.7.2019, p. 1) ('the Regulation').
(4) Please be aware that the term 'rights of custody' is defined in point 9 of Article 2(2) of the Regulation.
(5) Please copy the relevant part of the order.
(10) If more than two parties are concerned, please attach an additional sheet.
(11) Please copy the relevant part of the order.
(12) If more than one party is concerned, please attach an additional sheet.
(19) This point also covers situations where the costs are awarded in a separate decision. The mere fact that the amount of the costs has not been fixed yet should not prevent the court from issuing the certificate if a party wishes to seek recognition or enforcement of the substantive part of the decision.
(20) If more than one party has been ordered to bear the costs, please attach an additional sheet.
ANNEX IV
CERTIFICATE CONCERNING DECISIONS ORDERING THE RETURN OF A CHILD TO ANOTHER MEMBER STATE PURSUANT TO THE 1980 HAGUE CONVENTION (1) AND ANY PROVISIONAL, INCLUDING PROTECTIVE, MEASURES TAKEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 27(5) OF THE REGULATION ACCOMPANYING THEM
(Point (c) of Article 36(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1111 (2))
To be issued, upon application by a party, by the court of a Member State of origin of a return decision as communicated to the Commission pursuant to Article 103 of the Regulation, where the return decision needs to be enforced in another Member State due to a further abduction of the child(ren) after return was ordered, or where the return decision contains a provisional, including a protective, measure based on Article 27(5) of the Regulation to protect the child from the grave risk referred to in point (b) of Article 13(1) of the 1980 Hague Convention.
1. MEMBER STATE OF ORIGIN OF THE DECISION ORDERING THE RETURN OF THE CHILD(REN)* (3)
5. CHILD(REN) (4) TO BE RETURNED ACCORDING TO THE DECISION*
6. MEMBER STATE TO WHICH THE CHILD(REN) SHOULD BE RETURNED ACCORDING TO THE DECISION*
7. IF AND TO THE EXTENT STATED IN THE DECISION, THE CHILD(REN) IS (ARE) TO BE RETURNED TO (5)
7.1. Party 1
8. PRACTICAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE RETURN (IF AND TO THE EXTENT STATED IN THE DECISION) (6)
9. THE DECISION INCLUDES (A) PROVISIONAL, INCLUDING PROTECTIVE, MEASURES BASED ON ARTICLE 27(5) OF THE REGULATION TO PROTECT THE CHILD FROM THE GRAVE RISK REFERRED TO IN POINT (B) OF ARTICLE 13(1) OF THE 1980 HAGUE CONVENTION*
9.2.1. Description of the measure(s) ordered (7)
10. PARTY (8) AGAINST WHOM ENFORCEMENT IS SOUGHT*
10.1. Surname(s)*
10.2. Given name(s)*
10.3. Date of birth (dd/mm/yyyy)*
10.4. Place of birth (if available)
10.5. Identity number or social security number (if applicable and available)
10.6. Address (if available)
10.6.1. as stated in the decision …
10.6.2. any additional information (for example, concerning a different current address) …
12.2. Yes, without any restrictions (please indicate the date (dd/mm/yyyy) on which the decision became enforceable): …/…/……
12.3. Yes, but only against the party (9) as indicated in point … (please fill in)
12.3.1. Please indicate the date (dd/mm/yyyy) on which the decision became enforceable against this party: …/…/……
13. AS OF THE DATE OF ISSUANCE OF THE CERTIFICATE, THE DECISION HAS BEEN SERVED UPON THE PARTY(IES) (10) AGAINST WHOM ENFORCEMENT IS SOUGHT AS INDICATED IN POINT 10*
13.2. Not known to the court
13.3.1. Date of service (dd/mm/yyyy)
13.3.2. The decision was served in the following language(s):
14.2.1. Party in default of appearance as indicated in point …(please fill in)
14.2.2. That party was served with the document which instituted the proceedings or with an equivalent document
15.1. Child as indicated in point 5.1.
16. THE CHILD(REN) (12) CAPABLE OF FORMING HIS OR HER (THEIR) OWN VIEWS AS INDICATED IN POINT 15 WAS (WERE) GIVEN A GENUINE AND EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS HIS OR HER (THEIR) VIEWS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 21 OF THE REGULATION
16.1.2. No, for the following reasons:…
18.2. Any additional information on costs which might be relevant (for example, fixed amount or percentage; interests awarded; shared costs; where more than one party has been ordered to bear the costs, whether the whole amount may be collected from any one of them): …
Done at …, date (dd/mm/yyyy) ….
(8) If more than one party is concerned, please attach an additional sheet.
ANNEX V
CERTIFICATE CONCERNING CERTAIN DECISIONS GRANTING RIGHTS OF ACCESS
(Point (a) of Article 42(1) and point (a) of Article 47(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1111 (1))
To be issued, upon application by a party, by the court that has given the decision only if the conditions of Article 47(3) of the Regulation, as indicated in points 11 to 14, are met. If not, Annex III of the Regulation should be used.
5. PARTY(IES) (4) WHO WAS (WERE) GRANTED RIGHTS OF ACCESS*
5.1. Party 1*
5.1.6. Address (if available)
5.1.6.1. as stated in the decision …
5.1.6.2. any additional information (for example, concerning a different current address) …
6. RIGHTS OF ACCESS GRANTED ACCORDING TO THE DECISION AND PRACTICAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR THEIR EXERCISE (TO THE EXTENT STATED IN THE DECISION) (5)
7. PARTY(IES) (6) AGAINST WHOM ENFORCEMENT IS SOUGHT*
9. THE DECISION IS ENFORCEABLE IN THE MEMBER STATE OF ORIGIN*
9.2. Yes, without any restrictions (please indicate the date (dd/mm/yyyy) on which the decision became enforceable): …/…/……
9.3. Yes, but only against the party (7) as indicated in point … (please fill in)
9.3.1. Please indicate the date (dd/mm/yyyy) on which the decision became enforceable against this party: …/…/……
9.4. Yes, but limited to the following part(s) of the decision (please specify) …
9.4.1. Please indicate the date (dd/mm/yyyy) on which this (these) part(s) of the decision became enforceable: …/…/……
10. AS OF THE DATE OF ISSUANCE OF THE CERTIFICATE, THE DECISION HAS BEEN SERVED UPON THE PARTY(IES) (8) AGAINST WHOM ENFORCEMENT IS SOUGHT*
10.1. Upon the party as indicated in point 7.1*
10.2. Upon the party as indicated in point 7.2
11. ALL PARTIES CONCERNED WERE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD*
11.1. Yes (if not, Annex III of the Regulation should be used)
12. THE CHILD(REN) (9) AS INDICATED IN POINT 4 WAS (WERE) CAPABLE OF FORMING HIS OR HER (THEIR) OWN VIEWS*
13.1.1. Yes (if not, Annex III of the Regulation should be used)
14.2.1. Party (10) in default of appearance as indicated in point … (please fill in)
14.2.2. That party was served with the document which instituted the proceedings or with an equivalent document in sufficient time and in such a way as to enable that (those) party(ies) to arrange for his or her (their) defence
14.2.2.2. No, but the party in default of appearance nevertheless accepted the decision unequivocally (if not, Annex III of the Regulation should be used)
16.1. The decision also covers matrimonial matters, and the information on costs relating to the proceedings under this Regulation is provided solely in the certificate concerning decisions in matrimonial matters.
16.2. The decision also covers other matters of parental responsibility, and the information on costs relating to the proceedings under this Regulation is provided solely in the certificate concerning decisions in matters of parental responsibility.
Done at …, date (dd/mm/yyyy) …
(4) If more than two parties were granted rights of access, please attach an additional sheet.
(6) If the enforcement is sought against more than two parties, please attach an additional sheet.
ANNEX VI
CERTIFICATE CONCERNING CERTAIN DECISIONS ON THE SUBSTANCE OF RIGHTS OF CUSTODY GIVEN PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 29(6) OF THE REGULATION AND ENTAILING THE RETURN OF THE CHILD
(Article 29(6), point (b) of Article 42(1) and point (b) of Article 47(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1111 (1))
To be issued, upon application by a party, by the court that has given the decision pursuant to Article 29(6) in so far as this decision entails the return of the child and only if the conditions of Article 47(3) and (4) of the Regulation, as indicated in points 11 to 15, are met. If not, Annex III of the Regulation should be used.
7. PARTY (6) AGAINST WHOM ENFORCEMENT IS SOUGHT*
7.1. Surname(s)*
7.2. Given name(s)*
7.3. Date of birth (dd/mm/yyyy)
7.4. Place of birth (if available)
7.5. Identity number or social security number (if applicable and if available)
7.6. Address (if available)
7.6.1. as stated in the decision …
7.6.2. any additional information (for example, concerning a different current address) …
9. THE PART OF THE DECISION ENTAILING THE RETURN OF THE CHILD(REN) IS ENFORCEABLE IN THE MEMBER STATE OF ORIGIN*
9.3. Yes, but only against the party (7) as indicated in point … (please fill in):
10. AS OF THE DATE OF ISSUANCE OF THE CERTIFICATE, THE DECISION HAS BEEN SERVED UPON THE PARTY (8) AGAINST WHOM ENFORCEMENT IS SOUGHT AS INDICATED IN POINT 7*
15. THE COURT HAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN GIVING ITS DECISION THE REASONS FOR AND THE FACTS UNDERLYING THE PRIOR DECISION GIVEN IN ANOTHER MEMBER STATE PURSUANT TO POINT (B) OF ARTICLE 13(1), OR ARTICLE 13(2), OF THE HAGUE CONVENTION OF 25 OCTOBER 1980 ON THE CIVIL ASPECTS OF INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION*
16. THE DECISION INCLUDES (A) PROVISIONAL, INCLUDING PROTECTIVE, MEASURE(S)*
16.2.1. Description of the measure(s) ordered (11)
ANNEX VII
CERTIFICATE CONCERNING THE LACK OR LIMITATION OF ENFORCEABILITY OF CERTAIN DECISIONS GRANTING RIGHTS OF ACCESS OR ENTAILING THE RETURN OF THE CHILD WHICH HAVE BEEN CERTIFIED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 47 OF THE REGULATION
(Article 49 of Council Regulation (EC) 2019/1111 (1)
To be issued, upon application, where and to the extent that a decision certified in accordance with Article 47 of the Regulation has ceased to be enforceable or its enforceability has been suspended or limited in the Member State of origin.
3. DECISION WHICH HAS CEASED TO BE ENFORCEABLE OR WHOSE ENFORCEABILITY HAS BEEN SUSPENDED OR LIMITED*
3.1. Court which gave the decision (if different from point 2)
3.1.1. Name
3.1.2. Address
3.1.3. Tel./fax/e-mail
3.2. Details of the decision*
3.2.2. Reference number*
3.3. Details of the initial certificate
3.3.1. Date (dd/mm/yyyy) (if known)
3.3.2. Certificate in accordance with:
3.3.2.1. point (a) of Article 47(1) of the Regulation for a decision granting rights of access
3.3.2.2. point (b) of Article 47(1) of the Regulation for a decision on the substance of rights of custody given pursuant to Article 29(6) of the Regulation which entails the return of a child or children
4. THE ENFORCEABILITY OF THE DECISION REFERRED TO IN POINT 3*
4.1. has ceased
4.2. has been suspended
4.2.1. Where applicable, details on the duration of the suspension period: …
4.3. has been limited
4.3.1. Where applicable, details on the extent of this limitation: …
5. THE EFFECT(S) INDICATED IN POINT 4*
5.1. arose by operation of law
5.1.1. Where applicable, please indicate the relevant provision(s): …
5.2. were ordered by a decision
5.2.1. Court which gave the decision (if different from point 2)
5.2.1.2. Address
5.2.1.3. Tel./fax/e-mail
5.2.2. Details of the decision:
5.2.2.1. Date (dd/mm/yyyy)
5.2.2.2. Reference number
5.2.2.3. Content (3) …
ANNEX VIII
CERTIFICATE CONCERNING AN AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENT OR AN AGREEMENT ON DIVORCE OR LEGAL SEPARATION
(Point (a) of Article 66(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1111 (1)).
To be issued, upon application by a party, only if the Member State which empowered the public authority or other authority to formally draw up or register the authentic instrument or register the agreement had jurisdiction under Section 1 of Chapter II of the Regulation, as indicated in point 2, and the authentic instrument or agreement has binding legal effect in that Member State, as indicated in point 7.5 or 8.4.
2. THE MEMBER STATE OF ORIGIN HAD JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 1 OF CHAPTER II OF THE REGULATION*
3. COURT OR COMPETENT AUTHORITY ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE*
4. NATURE OF THE DOCUMENT*
4.1. Authentic instrument (then please fill in point 7)
4.2. Agreement (then please fill in point 8)
5. OBJECT OF THE AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENT OR AGREEMENT*
5.1. Divorce
5.2. Legal separation
6.1.1.6.1. as stated in the authentic instrument or agreement …
7. AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENT
7.1. Public authority or other authority empowered for that purpose which has drawn up or registered the authentic instrument (if different from court or competent authority as indicated in point 3)
7.2. Date (dd/mm/yyyy) on which the authentic instrument was drawn up by the authority as indicated in point 3 or in point 7.1
7.3. Reference number of the authentic instrument (if applicable)
7.4. Date (dd/mm/yyyy) on which the authentic instrument was registered in the Member State of origin (if different from the date indicated in point 7.2)
7.4.1. Reference number in the register (if applicable)
7.5. Date (dd/mm/yyyy) as of which the authentic instrument has binding legal effect in the Member State of origin
8. AGREEMENT
8.1. Public authority which registered the agreement (if different from the court or competent authority as indicated in point 3)
8.2. Date (dd/mm/yyyy) of registration of the agreement
8.3. Reference number in the register (if applicable)
8.4. Date (dd/mm/yyyy) as of which the agreement has binding legal effect in the Member State of origin
ANNEX IX
CERTIFICATE CONCERNING AN AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENT OR AGREEMENT IN MATTERS OF PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY
To be issued, upon application by a party, only if the Member State which empowered the public authority or other authority to formally draw up or register the authentic instrument or register the agreement had jurisdiction under Section 2 of Chapter II of the Regulation, as indicated in point 2, and the authentic instrument or agreement has binding legal effect in that Member State, as indicated in point 12.5 or 13.4.
The certificate must not be issued if there are indications that the content of the authentic instrument or agreement is against the best interests of the child.
4.1. Authentic instrument (then please fill in point 12)
4.2. Agreement (then please fill in point 13)
5. PARTIES (3) TO THE AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENT OR AGREEMENT*
6. CHILD(REN) (4) COVERED BY THE AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENT OR AGREEMENT*
7.1. Rights of custody attributed or agreed in the authentic instrument or agreement (6)
7.3. The authentic instrument or agreement entails the handover of the child(ren)
8.1. Rights of access attributed or agreed in the authentic instrument or agreement (8)
9.1. Right(s) attributed or agreed in the authentic instrument or agreement (10)
11. THE CHILD(REN) (13) CAPABLE OF FORMING HIS OR HER (THEIR) OWN VIEWS AS INDICATED IN POINT 10 WAS (WERE) GIVEN A GENUINE AND EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS HIS OR HER (THEIR) VIEWS
12. AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENT
12.1. Public authority or other authority empowered for that purpose which has drawn up or registered the authentic instrument (if different from court or competent authority as indicated in point 3)
12.1.1. Name
12.1.2. Address
12.2. Date (dd/mm/yyyy) on which the authentic instrument was drawn up by the authority as indicated in point 3 or in point 12.1
12.3. Reference number of the authentic instrument (if applicable)
12.4. Date (dd/mm/yyyy) on which the authentic instrument was registered in the Member State of origin (if different from the date indicated in point 12.2)
12.4.1. Reference number in the register (if applicable)
12.5. Date (dd/mm/yyyy) as of which the authentic instrument has binding legal effect in the Member State of origin
13. AGREEMENT
13.1. Public authority which registered the agreement (if different from the court or competent authority as indicated in point 3)
13.2. Date (dd/mm/yyyy) of registration of the agreement
13.3. Reference number in the register (if applicable)
13.4. Date (dd/mm/yyyy) as of which the agreement has binding legal effect in the Member State of origin
14. THE AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENT OR AGREEMENT IS ENFORCEABLE IN THE MEMBER STATE OF ORIGIN*
14.1.1.1. The authentic instrument or agreement does not contain an enforceable obligation.
14.1.2. Yes, without any restrictions (please indicate the date (dd/mm/yyyy) on which the authentic instrument or agreement became enforceable)
14.1.3. Yes, but only against the following party (14) as indicated in point … (please fill in) …
14.1.4. Yes, but limited to the following part(s) of the authentic instrument or agreement (please specify) …
14.3. Concerning other rights as indicated in point 9
(6) Please copy the relevant part of the authentic instrument or agreement.
(10) Please copy the relevant part of the authentic instrument or agreement.
ANNEX X
Correlation table
Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 This Regulation
Article 1 Article 1
— Article 1(3)
Article 6 Article 6(2)
Article 7 Article 6(1) and (3)
Article 8(1) Article 7(1)
Article 10 Article 9
— Article 10
Article 11(1) Article 22
Article 11(3) Article 24(1)
— Article 24(2)
— Article 29(1) and (2)
Article 12 —
Article 13 Article 11
Article 15(1), (2)(a) and (b) and (4) Article 12(1)
Article 15(2)(c) Article 13(1)
Article 16 Article 17 (a) and (b)
— Article 17 (c)
Article 21(1) and (2) Article 30(1) and (2)
Article 21(3) Article 30(3) and (4)
Article 23 (a), (c), (d), (e) and (f) Article 39 (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e)
Article 23 (b) Article 39(2)
Article 27(1) Articles 33 (a) and 44 (a)
— Article 33 (b)
Article 27(2) —
Article 40 Articles 42 and 47(1)
— Article 47(4), (5) and (6)
Article 43 Articles 37 and 48
Article 50 Article 74(1)
— Article 79 (a)
Article 55(1) (a) Article 79 (b)
Article 55(1) (b) Article 79 (c)
— Article 79 (d)
Article 55(1) (c) Article 79 (e)
Article 55(1) (d) Article 79 (f)
Article 55(1) (e) Article 79 (g)
Article 57(1) and (2) —
Article 60 (a), (b), (c) and (d) Article 95
Article 60 (e) Article 96
Article 64(1) Article 100(1)
Article 64(2), (3) and (4) —
— Article 100(2)
Article 65 (1) Article 101(1)
Article 66 Article 102
Annex I Annex II
— Annex I
Annex II Annex III
— Annex IV
Annex III Annex V
Annex IV Annex VI
— Annex VII
— Annex VIII
— Annex IX
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1021
|
__label__wiki
| 0.594631
| 0.594631
|
Current Enzyme Inhibition
Scopus, EMBASE, Chemical Abstracts Service/SciFinder, ProQuest, ChemWeb, Google Scholar, EMBiology, PubsHub, Genamics JournalSeek, Cabell's Directory, MediaFinder®-Standard Periodical Directory, J-Gate, CNKI Scholar, Suweco CZ, TOC Premier, EBSCO, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory and JournalTOCs.
Claudiu T. Supuran
For journals, the following publication policies are applied by Bentham Science.
Bentham Science Publishers follows the single blind peer-review procedure for submissions of all manuscripts to its journals, except for a selected number of patent journals where double blind review is followed.
All submitted articles are subjected to an extensive peer review in consultation with members of the journal s editorial board and independent external referees (usually three reviewers). All manuscripts/chapters are assessed rapidly and the decision based on all the peer reviewers' comments, taken by the journal’s Editor-in-Chief, is then conveyed to the author(s).
Submissions from the Editor-in-Chief will undergo independent peer-review and will be submitted to another Editor for his decision on acceptance.
Articles must be written in good English in a clear and correct style in order to maintain uniformity throughout the text. Articles submitted are copyedited before they are published.
High-quality, bound/unbound, print/e-prints can be purchased for all published articles.
Articles must be submitted by one of the authors of the manuscript, and should not be submitted by anyone on their behalf. The principal/corresponding author will be required to submit a Copyright Letter along with the manuscript, on behalf of all the co-authors (if any). The author(s) will confirm that the manuscript (or any part of it) has not been published previously or is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. Furthermore, any illustration, structure or table that has been published elsewhere must be reported, and copyright permission for reproduction must be obtained.
Appeals and Complaints
Generally, the editorial decisions are not reverted. However, authors who think that their manuscript was rejected due to a misunderstanding or mistake may seek an explanation for the decision. Appeals must give sound reasoning and compelling evidence against the criticism raised in the rejection letter. A difference of opinion as to the interest, novelty, or suitability of the manuscript for the journal will not be considered as an appeal. The EIC and other relevant editors will consider the appeal and the decision thereafter taken by the journal will be deemed final. Acceptance of the manuscript is not guaranteed even if the journal agrees to reconsider the manuscript, and the reconsideration process may involve previous or new reviewers or editors and substantive revision.
Authors who wish to make a complaint should refer them to the Editor-in-Chief of the journal concerned. Complaints to the Publisher may be emailed to info@benthamscience.net
Financial contributions and any potential conflict of interest must be clearly acknowledged under the heading ‘Conflict of Interest’. Authors must list the source(s) of funding for the study. This should be done for each author.
Plagiarism Prevention
Bentham Science uses the iThenticate software to detect instances of overlapping and similar text in submitted manuscripts. iThenticate software checks content against a database of periodicals, the Internet, and a comprehensive article database. It generates a similarity report, highlighting the percentage of overlap between the uploaded article and the published material. Any instance of content overlap is further scrutinized for suspected plagiarism according to the publisher s Editorial Policies. Bentham Science allows an overall similarity of 20% for a manuscript to be considered for publication. The similarity percentage is further checked keeping the following important points in view
Low Text Similarity
The text of every submitted manuscript is checked using the Content Tracking mode in iThenticate. The Content Tracking mode ensures that manuscripts with an overall low percentage similarity (but may have a higher similarity from a single source) are not overlooked. The acceptable limit for similarity of text from a single source is 5%. If the similarity level is above 5%, the manuscript is returned to the author for paraphrasing the text and citing the original source of the copied material.
It is important to mention that the text taken from different sources with an overall low similarity percentage will be considered as a plagiarized content if the majority of the article is a combination of copied material.
High Text Similarity
There may be some manuscripts with an overall low similarity percentage, but a higher percentage from a single source. A manuscript may have less than 20% overall similarity but there may be 15% similar text taken from a single article. The similarity index in such cases is higher than the approved limit for a single source. Authors are advised to thoroughly rephrase the similar text and properly cite the original source to avoid plagiarism and copyright violation.
We all know that scholarly manuscripts are written after thorough review of previously published articles. It is therefore not easy to draw a clear boundary between legitimate representation and plagiarism. However, the following important features can assist in identifying different kinds of plagiarized content. These are:
Reproduction of others words, sentences, ideas or findings as one s own without proper acknowledgement.
Text recycling, also known as self-plagiarism. It is an author s use of a previous publication in another paper without proper citation and acknowledgement of the original source.
Poor paraphrasing: Copying complete paragraphs and modifying a few words without changing the structure of original sentences or changing the sentence structure but not the words.
Verbatim copying of text without putting quotation marks and not acknowledging the work of the original author.
Properly citing a work but poorly paraphrasing the original text is considered as unintentional plagiarism. Similarly, manuscripts with language somewhere between paraphrasing and quoting are not acceptable. Authors should either paraphrase properly or quote and in both cases, cite the original source.
Higher similarity in the abstract, introduction, materials and methods, and discussion and conclusion sections indicates that the manuscript may contain plagiarized text. Authors can easily explain these parts of the manuscript in many ways. However, technical terms and sometimes standard procedures cannot be rephrased; therefore Editors must review these sections carefully before making a decision.
Plagiarism in Published Manuscripts
Published manuscripts which are found to contain plagiarized text are retracted from the journal s website after careful investigation and approval by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal. A Retraction Note as well as a link to the original article is published on the electronic version of the plagiarized manuscript and an addendum with retraction notification in the particular journal.
Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access) in Subscription Journals
Accepted articles can be published online for free open access. Open access publishing provides maximum dissemination of the article to the largest audience. All authors will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to pay to have their paper made freely available on publication. If authors do not select the 'Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access)' option, then their article will be published with standard subscription-based access.
Copyright (Subscription Journals)
Editors/Authors who contribute in a Bentham s Journal will transfer copyright to their work to Bentham Science Publishers. Submission of a manuscript to the respective journals implies that all editors/authors have read and agreed to the content of the copyright letter.
HUMAN AND ANIMAL RIGHTS
All clinical investigations should be conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki principles. For all manuscripts reporting data from studies involving human participants, formal review and approval by an appropriate institutional review board or ethics committee are required.
For research involving animals, the authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the standards set forth in the eighth edition of “Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals” (grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/guide-for-the-care-and-use-of-laboratory-animals_prepub.pdf published by the National Academy of Sciences, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.).
Research Involving Animals
Research work on animals should be carried out in accordance with the NC3Rs ARRIVE Guidelines. For In Vivo Experiments, please visit https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/arrive-guidelines
Authors should clearly state the name of the approval committee, highlighting that legal and ethical approvals were obtained prior to initiation of the research work carried out on animals, and that the experiments were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations stated below.
US authors should cite compliance with the US National Research Council's "Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals"
The US Public Health Service's "Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals" and "Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals"
UK authors should conform to UK legislation under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 Amendment Regulations (SI 2012/3039).
European authors outside the UK should conform to Directive 2010/63/EU.
Research on animals should adhere to ethical guidelines of The Basel Declaration and the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS) ethical guidelines.
The manuscript should clearly include a declaration of compliance with the relevant guidelines (e.g. the revised Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 in the UK and Directive 2010/63/EU in Europe) and/or relevant permissions or licenses obtained by the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
Research Involving Plants
All experimental research on plants (either cultivated or wild), should comply with international guidelines. The manuscript should include a declaration of compliance of field studies with relevant guidelines and/or relevant permissions or licenses obtained by the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
Patient Consent
Compliance with the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors www.icmje.org) is recommended, in accordance with the patient’s consent for research or participation in a study as per the applicable laws and regulations regarding the privacy and/or security of personal information, including, but not limited to, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA") and other U.S. federal and state laws relating to confidentiality and security of personally distinguishable evidence, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (EU) 2016/679 and member state implementing legislation, Canada's Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, India's Information Technology Act and related Privacy Rules, (together "Data Protection and Privacy Laws").
It is the responsibility of the author to ensure that:
Patients' names, initials, or hospital numbers are not mentioned anywhere in the manuscript (including figures).
Authors are responsible for obtaining the patient consent-to-disclose forms for all recognizable patients in photographs, videos, or other information that may be published in the Journal, in derivative works, or on the journal’s web site and for providing the manuscript to the recognizable patient for review before submission.
The consent-to-disclose form should indicate specific use (publication in the medical literature in print and online, with the understanding that patients and the public will have access) of the patient's information and any images in figures or videos, and must contain the patient's signature or that of a legal guardian along with a statement that the patient or legal guardian has been offered the opportunity to review the identifying materials and the accompanying manuscript.
If the manuscript has an individuals’ data, such as personal details, audio-video material, etc., consent should be obtained from that individual. In case of children, consent should be obtained from the parent or the legal guardian.
A specific declaration of such approval and consent-to-disclose form must be made in the copyright letter and in a stand-alone paragraph at the end of the article especially in the case of human studies where inclusion of a statement regarding obtaining the written informed consent from each subject or subject's guardian is a must. The original should be retained by the guarantor or the corresponding author. Editors may request to provide the original forms by fax or email.
All such case reports require by a proper consent being obtained prior to publishing.
Editors may request that authors provide documentation of the formal review and recommendation from the institutional review board or ethics committee responsible for oversight of the study. The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The author will be held responsible for false statements or failure to fulfill the above-mentioned requirements.
Non-identifiable Images
Anonymous images, that do not identify the individual directly or indirectly, such as through any identifying marks or text, do not require formal consent, for example, X-rays, ultrasound images, pathology slides or laparoscopic images.
In case consent is not obtained, concealing the identity through eye bars or blurring the face would not be acceptable.
UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
Unethical behavior and misconduct may be pointed out by anyone to the Editor and Publisher with sufficient evidences. The Editor, in consultation with the Publisher, will initiate investigation against this Unethical misconduct, complete the procedure till an unbiased decision is reached, and maintain confidentiality throughout the process of the investigation. The Author should be given the opportunity to reply to all minor or major accusations.
In case of serious breaches, the employer may be informed where appropriate, by the Editor/Publisher, after reviewing all available information and evidences or after seeking help from experts in that field.
Author(s) and Reviewers must be informed in case of misinterpretation or mishandling of International Acceptable Standards
A strict notice should be sent to the author and reviewer to avoid future unethical misconduct
An Editorial on the reported misconduct should be published or official notice of unethical behavior should be posted on the website
Official letter about this misconduct should be issued to the Head of Departments, Funding Agencies of the accused author and the reviewer, as well as Abstracting & Indexing Agencies.
Where required, retraction and withdrawal of publication may be undertaken from the Publisher’s journal in discussion with the Head of the Department of the author or reviewer, and other higher authorities should be informed
The Publisher may impose restrictions for some period on future publications from the accused author in the journals
Errata or a Corrigenda and Corrections in Published Articles
Authors and readers are encouraged to notify the Editor-in-Chief if they find errors in published content, authors names and affiliations or if they have reasons for concern over the legitimacy of a publication. In such cases the journal will publish an ERRATUM or a CORRIGENDUM, in consultation with Editor-in-Chief and authors of the article, and/or replace or retract the article.
Articles in Press (articles that have been accepted for publication or published as E-pub Ahead of Schedule but which have not been formally published with volume/issue/page information) that include errors, or are determined to violate the publishing ethics guidelines such as multiple submission, fake claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like, may be Withdrawn from the journal. Withdrawal means that the article files are removed and replaced with a PDF stating that the article has been withdrawn from the journal in accordance with BSP Editorial Policies.
Article Retraction
Published articles (with volume/issue/page information) which may contain infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submissions, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like are retracted.
A retraction note titled Retraction: [article title] signed by the authors and/or the Editor-in-Chief is published in the paginated part of a subsequent issue of the journal and listed in the contents list.
In the electronic version, a link is made to the original article.
The online article is preceded by a screen containing the retraction note. It is to this screen that the link resolves; the reader can then proceed to the article itself.
The original article is retained unchanged with a watermark on the PDF indicating on each page that it is retracted.
Concurrent Publication/Simultaneous Submission
It is a condition of publication that manuscripts submitted to the Bentham journal have not been published and will not be simultaneously submitted or published elsewhere. Plagiarism is strictly forbidden, and by submitting the article for publication the authors agree that the publishers have the legal right to take appropriate action against the authors, if plagiarism or fabricated information is discovered.
Abstracts and posters of conferences, results presented at meetings (for example, to inform investigators or participants about findings), results databases (data without interpretation, discussion, context or conclusions in the form of tables and text to describe data/information where this is not easily presented in tabular form) are not considered prior publication.
Authors who wish to publish translations of the articles that have been published elsewhere should ensure that they have appropriate permission(s), indicate clearly that the material has been translated and re-published, and indicate clearly the original source of the material. The Editor-in-Chief may request copies of related publications if he/she is concerned about overlap and possible redundancy.
PERMISSION FOR REPRODUCTION
Bentham Science has collaborated with the Copyright Clearance Center to meet its customer s licensing, besides rights & permission needs.
The Copyright Clearance Center s RightsLink® service makes it faster and easier to secure permission from Bentham Science journal titles. Simply visit Journals by Title and locate the desired content. Then go to the article s abstract and click on Rights and Permissions to open the RightsLink s page. If you are unable to locate the content you wish to use or are unable to secure the rights you are seeking, please e-mail us at permissions@benthamscience.net
Published/reproduced material should not be included unless written permission has been obtained from the copyright holder, which should be forwarded to the Editorial Office in case of acceptance of the article for publication.
Responsibility for the content published by Bentham Science Publishers in any of its journals, including any opinions expressed therein, rests exclusively with the author(s) of such content. To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, BSP (on its own behalf, and on behalf of its staff and members of its editorial board) disclaims responsibility for any and all injury and/or damage (whether financial or otherwise) to persons or property, resulting directly or indirectly from any ideas, methods, instructions or products (including errors in the same) referred to in the content of any of BSP s journals. Any dispute arising, including any claim shall be governed exclusively by the laws of the United Arab Emirates, as applied in the Emirate of Sharjah.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1022
|
__label__wiki
| 0.562022
| 0.562022
|
2008-09Last 16Round 3
Hemofarm Stada Vrsac 88
Crvena Zvezda 73
February 10, 2009 CET: 17:30
Local time: 17:30 CENTAR MILLENIUM
Hemofarm Stada took over second place in Group K with a comfortable 88-73 victory at home over Serbian rival Crvena Zvezda. Hemofarm improved its record to 2-1 in the group by holding Crvena Zvezda to 39% two-point shooting and 35% on three-pointers. Crvena Zvezda dropped to 1-2 in the Last 16 group. After a back-and-forth first quarter, Hemofarm took early control of the game with an 11-0 second quarter run and a 12-point lead. Crvena Zvezda had the deficit to 5 points at halftime but Hemofarm opened the third period with a 13-0 run. And an 8-0 surge pushed the gap to 21 points later in the third. Crvena Zvezda tried one more comeback but another 8-0 Hemofarm run in the fourth finished off the victory. Miljan Pavkovic hit 4 three-pointers in scoring 16 points along with 5 assists. Milan Macvan added 15 points and 9 rebounds. Stefan Markovic scored 13 points, Bojan Krstovic had 12 and Milos Borisov chipped in 10 points. Crvena Zvezda, which was without big man Lawrence Roberts, was led by 14 points from Boris Bakic. Vladimir Stimac added 12 points and three other players - Andre Owens, Marko Keselj and Mirko Kovac - all tallied 9 points.
Crvena Zvezda jumped ahead 0-4 on a Stimac dunk and two Marko Marinovic free throws. Krstovic got Hemofarm on the board with a three-pointer to start a 7-0 run for a 7-4 lead. Keselj hit back-to-back baskets to push Crvena Zvezda back ahead 7-9. Nebojsa Joksimovic and Krstovic nailed consecutive triples and Hemofarm took its biggest lead of the quarter at 13-9. Crvena Zvezda trailed 14-11 but Tadija Dragicevic drained a triple to knot the game. Bakic gave Crvena Zvezda back the lead and Nemanja Bjelica's free throws finished the first quarter with the guests ahead 17-18. A Bjelica foul shot started the second quarter and it was 20-21 after Bakic's basket. But Hemofarm then took control of the game. Krstovic's score started an 11-0 run which featured two baskets by Borisov, including a three-ball to make it 31-21. After failing to score in four straight possessions, Stimac ended the run with an offensive rebound put-back and Bakic cut the deficit to 32-25. Milivoje Bozovic threw down a dunk and Pavkovic hit his second triple of the quarter to push the advantage to 12 points at 37-25. A Dragicevic triple made it 39-30 before Bozovic scored 5 points for a 44-32 Hemofarm lead. But Crvena Zvezda scored the final 7 points of the half - 4 Marinovic free throws and a late Keselj triple - to trim the halftime deficit to 44-39.
Hemofarm started the second half tough on defense and regained control of the game with a 13-0 run. Pavkovic nailed 2 three-pointers and Boban Marjanovic and Markovic both threw down dunks in the surge for an 18-point lead. 57-39. Crvena Zvezda finally scored its first points nearly four minutes into the third period with a Bakic basket. Stimac converted a three-point play and then after three scores by Macvan, Stimac cut the deficit to 63-50. Hemofarm put together another push as Borisov and Bozovic combined for 6 points in an 8-0 run for a 21-point lead - 71-50. An Owens foul shot made it 71-51 going into the fourth. Crvena Zvezda made four foul shots in scoring the first 7 points of the fourth. And two free throws by Owens trimmed the deficit to 11 points - 73-62. But Markovic drained a triple and Macvan scored three points in an 8-0 for an 81-62 advantage midway through the quarter. Hemofarm would push the lead back up to 21 points and Crvena Zvezda could get no closer than 15 points the rest of the way.
Eurocupbasketball.com
Referees: MOUZAKIS, COSTAS; PEREZ NIZ, MIGUEL ANGEL; LATISEVS, OLEGS
Hemofarm Stada Vrsac 17 27 27 17
Crvena Zvezda 18 21 12 22
Hemofarm Stada Vrsac
4 PAVKOVIC, MILJAN 27:44 16 1/3 4/8 2/2 1 1 5 1 4 1 3 2 11
5 DESPOTOVIC, PETAR 6:55 2 2/2 2 1 1
7 JOKSIMOVIC, NEBOJSA 16:54 8 1/1 1/3 3/4 1 2 2 3 5
8 BOZOVIC, MILIVOJE 16:18 9 4/5 0/1 1/2 2 7 9 1 1 1 3 1 14
9 MARKOVIC, STEFAN 28:27 13 2/4 1/4 6/8 1 1 2 5 1 3 3 1 2 7 18
10 SAVOVIC, BORIS 4:53 0/2 1 1 1 -2
11 KRSTOVIC, BOJAN 25:48 12 3/5 2/2 2 2 4 1 1 3 3 1 11
13 MACVAN, MILAN 28:27 15 7/10 0/1 1/2 9 9 2 1 3 2 21
14 PETROVIC, UROS DNP - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
15 BORISOV, MILOS 14:12 10 1/2 1/1 5/5 1 1 2 1 3 13
20 MARJANOVIC, BOBAN 15:24 3 1/2 1/2 1 2 3 3 2 2 2 3
25 BADER, MARTON 14:58 0/2 0/2 2 2 4 4 1 -3
Totals 200:00 88 20/36 9/20 21/29 11 24 35 14 4 16 7 2 26 23 92
55.6% 45% 72.4%
Head coach: KARADZIC, STEVAN
4 KESELJ, MARKO 22:11 9 3/4 1/3 1 1 1 1 2 1 4
9 KIKANOVIC, ELMEDIN 7:38 0/2 1 1 -1
11 KOVAC, MIRKO 17:19 9 2/3 0/1 5/6 2 2 2 1 5 2 6
14 MARINOVIC, MARKO 14:13 8 0/3 0/1 8/8 1 2 3 3 1 5 14
17 STEVIC, OLIVER 13:48 2 1/4 0/1 3 3 1 1 1
20 DRAGICEVIC, TADIJA 17:36 6 0/1 2/3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 7
21 MILOSEVIC, MILAN 14:32 1 0/2 1/2 2 2 1 1 1 1
23 OWENS, ANDRE 28:49 9 0/1 2/4 3/4 3 3 1 1 2 3 5 10
24 SEPA, FILIP DNP - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
30 STIMAC, VLADIMIR 25:11 12 4/12 0/1 4/5 3 3 1 2 1 2 5 4 2
33 BAKIC, BORIS 26:39 14 7/10 0/1 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 3 14
44 BJELICA, NEMANJA 12:04 3 0/1 3/4 1 2 3 1 4 3 2
Totals 200:00 73 17/43 5/14 24/30 6 18 24 8 7 10 2 7 24 25 57
39.5% 35.7% 80%
Head coach: PESIC, SVETISLAV
KARADZIC, STEVAN
"Like I said many times, we fulfilled our goal reaching the Last 16 in the Eurocup. Each game is a new experience and each win is a new success for this young team. Before the game our only ambition was to give our maximum. After the game I can say that we needed to have won with a bigger difference. We opened the game a little bit weaker, but later my players were really great on defense. We managed to build a huge leading margin because of our three-points shooting and that served us much better than before. It simply was an excellent game."
PESIC, SVETISLAV
"Hemofarm dominated all the way and in all basketball elements. I am satisfied with the final score because the margin could have been even wider. I think Hemofarm showed tonight that it is the strongest team that we have faced this season so far. We were not able to keep close, but there is another chance to for us next when we play the Eurocup home game against this same Hemofarm. Tonight only Boris Bakic and Vladimir Stimac were in shape for my team."
REGULAR SEASON LAST 16 QUARTERFINALS SEMIFINALS FINALS
Dynamo Moscow 94
Maroussi Costa Coffee 73
February 10 17:30 CET LIVE FINAL
Panellinios Athens 73
Turk Telekom 67
Benetton Basket 99
Zadar 93
Unics 91
Azovmash Mariupol 91
Pamesa Valencia 88
Lietuvos Rytas Vilnius 105
Artland Dragons 64
Spirou Basket 59
iurbentia Bilbao 79
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1023
|
__label__cc
| 0.538148
| 0.461852
|
Least Boobook (Ninox sumbaensis)
Least Boobook (Ninox sumbaensis) at Billa, Matalawa National Park, Sumba
Least Boobook (Ninox sumbaensis) also known as the little Sumba boobook or little Sumba hawk-owl, is a species of owl in the family Strigidae. It is endemic to the Indonesian island of Sumba. Its natural habitat is subtropical or tropical moist lowland forests.
Ninox sumbaensis was formally described only recently, although the taxon has been known to ornithologists since the late 1980s (Olsen et al. 2002). It is currently very poorly known and has only been recorded from three localities on Sumba, Indonesia (Linsley et al. 1998, Olsen et al. 2002, Benstead and Benstead in prep.). Tracewski et al. (2016) estimated the maximum Area of Occupancy (calculated as the remaining tree area within the species’s range) to be c.159 km2, rounded here to 160 km2.
This species is very poorly known but it is thought to be uncommon given that it escaped detection for many years and there are few records available. It is placed in the band 10,000-19,999 mature individuals, equating to 15,000-29,999 individuals in total, rounded here to 15,000-30,000 individuals. This preliminary population estimate requires clarification.
It appears to be limited to small patches of primary, disturbed primary, secondary and degraded forest at 600-950 m on Sumba. Young offspring have been observed in November (Olsen et al. 2009). Survey work is required to ascertain the distribution and status of this poorly known owl. As a precaution, protect significant areas of suitable forest, in both strictly protected areas and community-led multiple use areas
Komodo & West Flores Birding Tour
Komodo – Sano Nggoang Flores Birding
Sumba Birding Tours
Komodo – Flores – Sumba Birding
Komodo Photo Tours
Flores – Komodo Photo Tours
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1026
|
__label__wiki
| 0.585329
| 0.585329
|
Australia Website:
order line 020 7400 4200
The Oxford Shakespeare: As You Like It
Edited by Alan Brissenden
Published by Oxford University Press
Unconventional and witty, this play tells the tale of the most playful of romances. It is Shakespeare’s ground-breaking comedy. Published by Oxford University Press.
Printed on Caxton Wove Off-White paper
Bound in buckram with a printed paper label
Coloured endpapers
Spine blocked in gold
Head and tail bands
8¾” x 5½”
Published by Oxford University Press and bound in hardback buckram by The Folio Society, The Oxford Shakespeare series offers authoritative editions of Shakespeare’s plays. The early printings have been scrupulously re-examined and interpreted by eminent scholars, who also provide introductory essays covering all relevant background information, together with an appraisal of critical views and of the plays in performance. The exhaustive commentaries pay particular attention to language and staging. Reprints of sources, music for songs, genealogical tables and maps are included where necessary; many of the volumes are illustrated, and all contain an index.
Each book has an individual editor, with the whole series overseen by Stanley Wells.
Alan Brissenden is a world-renowned Shakespeare scholar who specialises in the role of dance in Shakespeare’s plays. He studied in Sydney and London before taking up a post at the University of Adelaide. In 1996 Brissenden was made a Member of the Order of Australia (AM) for his services to the arts.
020 7400 4200 [email protected] Clove Building, 4 Maguire Street, London SE1 2NQ
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1027
|
__label__wiki
| 0.765727
| 0.765727
|
The Fast & The Furious
Logo Evolution
Antaries
Movie Review – Harry Potter & The Philosopher’s Stone
Principal Cast : Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, John Cleese, Robbie Coltrane, Warwick Davis, Richard Griffiths, Richard Harris, Ian Hart, John Hurt, Alan Rickman, Fiona Shaw, Maggie Smith, Julie Walters.
Synopsis: A young boy discovers he’s actually a wizard, and is whisked off to Hogwarts, the school for wizards and witches, in order to learn about his past, namely, that he survived an encounter with long-dead evil wizard Voldemort.
Long, magical and glowing with an inner cinematic beauty, JK Rowlings boy wizard is faithfully brought to the big screen in this, the first film in the Harry Potter series. Harry Potter, a character in a set of books of the same name, is a young lad who, one day, finds out that he’s not actually a normal boy, but is in fact, a wizard. his parents were wizards, his family is legendary in wizarding circles, and by crikey, he’s about to get some kind of an education.
Expectations were high when Harry Potter & The Philosophers Stone was released (or, as it was in the US, The Sorcerers Stone, because idiot American studios felt that the idiot American public wouldn’t understand what a philosopher was… er, really? What idiots.) since the novels had become gargantuan successes in their own right, obtaining a legion of devoted fans. JK Rowling, at the point at which Philosopher’s was released, was already a multi-millionaire based upon the novels’ success, and when the film deal was made, she became one of the wealthiest women in England, if not the world. Warner Brothers studios bought the rights to the books, and set about creating the film series we all know and love today. Rowling was paid an estimated $US2m for the rights.
The Philosophers Stone tells of Harry’s induction into the world of wizardry and witchcraft, after escaping the clutches of his vile Aunt and Uncle to attend Hogwart’s School, where he will grow to learn his craft and uncover many secrets about his family and their past. Since his family is almost legendary within the wizarding world, Harry Potters arrival at Hogwarts is greeted with a mixture of excitement (from those who know the truth) and disdain (from those who see Harry as a threat). Harry is introduced to the varying characters and creatures that will come to be familiar faces to us all, as he spends his first year at the ancient school.
The Philosophers Stone was given a pretty decent rap by critics when it first debuted, and I felt it was about time to have another look at the original film of this massive series, to see how it stacks up today.
Orphaned youngster Harry Potter is living a lonely existence with his abusive Aunt and Uncle, who abuse him and take advantage of him since he was foisted upon them when his parents were killed by Voldemort, an evil wizard who overshadows almost all the events in the series. Harry’s Aunt and Uncle know about his family’s legacy, and try desperately to prevent Harry from having any knowledge of it. Unfortunately for them, magic is no match for human stupidity, and Harry eventually finds himself whisked away to Hogwarts, where he meets Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger, two fellow students about to start in the same year as Harry himself. Ron, a red-headed clumsy boy, immediately takes a shine to Harry, and they become fast friends. Hermione, as the abrasive know-it-all girl whom we all suspect has a soft spot for Harry but will never admit it, hangs about with the two boys since the other girls don’t really like her.
Once at the school, they are sorted into “houses”, and assigned their classes. They meet many varied teachers and instructors, particularly the snarling, malevolent Severus Snape, who teaches, among other things, the skills of potion making. Snape is portrayed by the delightful Alan Rickman, who appears to be a Bad Guy, but in actual fact is not quite what everybody thinks…. Dumbledore, played by a marvellous Richard Harris, is the headmaster of the school, and one of the wisest and most powerful wizards walking the earth. He is often accompanied on screen by lovely Maggie Smith as Minerva McGonnagall, and both of them were responsible for Harry being given to his Aunt and Uncle for safekeeping. The film features a plethora of great British and European talent on screen, and although quite a few end up only as glorified cameos, you get the sense by this that no expense was spared to get this film made. John Cleese, Richard Griffiths, Warwick Davis, Julie Walters are some of the big name luminaries who grace the walls of Hogwarts and the pathways of Harry’s life.
So how does The Philosophers Stone stack up today? Well, to start with, the film is quite lengthy, and its pacing relies heavily on the faithful adaption of the original novel into a script: one which is extremely faithful, by most accounts. The development of the story is protracted, with the antagonist popping up only right towards the end. The trouble with Philosophers Stone is that it needs to set up the world in which Harry exists, and generate some character development so we all know who these people are: after all, we’re going to be seeing a lot more of them over time. As such, Philosophers tries to be true to the original novel, to maintain a cinematic flavour, and entertain without becoming either preachy or bogged down in the minutia of Harry’s world. Chris Columbus, himself responsible for many a hit-and-miss film (Home Alone, Mrs Doubtfire, Nine Months, Bicentennial Man, among others) managed to strike just the right balance between slavish devotion to the original novel, and a more cinematic, wide-screen feel to proceedings.
The plotting is such that each introduction to a new character, a new place, is given the jaw-dropping respect it deserves, although after a while, when you’re busting for a toilet break, thing’s don’t improve. The Quidditch match, with Harry zooming about through the air in what is really some kind of extreme broomstick sport, is a highlight of the film, and would come to be repeated in the other films as they were made. However, the big sticking point is the obtuse and dense final act, with the unleashing of Voldemort into the film: this part of the film is talky, ill-defined and badly structured. When your key villain, your central antagonist for the entire series, is actually stuck on the back of somebody’s head, the film lost any and all momentum it had generated up until that point. It’s a silly little thing, but there was no tension, no real fear generated. Voldemort, the whispered name of the deadly wizard responsible for Harry’s parents’ death, should have been a lot more convincing than this, dreadful CGI effort. When watching this in the cinema, I felt completely let down. Was that it? Was that the great villain we had only heard mentioned in minuscule detail? Talk about underwhelming.
The principal cast of Harry, Hermione and Ron are played very, very well by Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Waston, and Rupert Grint, respectively. Radcliffe has an enormous burden to carry this film, as the title star, and much has been made of this first effort, in which he spends a great deal of time wide-eyed and startled. As a child actor, they couldn’t have picked a better looking kid, but it’s just a pity he can’t act.Watson, on the other hand, is luminous, her acid-tongued belittling of all around her wonderfully portrayed and perfectly captured by the young actress. She’s a little wooden in moments, although for much of the film she seems to find her acting feet and does a great job. Then there’s Grint, who manages to maintain that pained, downtrodden expression throughout the film, and of all three child actors, it’s he who is the most naturalistic.
Columbus creates a world unlike any we’ve seen before, and fan’s of the book lavished praise on the way in which the film-makers constructed things that, until now, had only existed on the printed page and in people’s imaginations. Harry Potter’s first film outing is a long, slightly bloated, effect-heavy affair, occasionally clunky but most assuredly commercial, and although some of the effects will lose a lot by comparison with the current stuff Hollywood’s churning out, there’s still plenty of magic left in the original adventure of the boy wizard. A decent adventure, with plenty for people to keep an eye out for and some amazing production values.
Rodney Twelftree
If you’re reading this, you’ve now learned that Rodney loves movies and will continue to write about them until he falls over dead. And even then he’ll have some content scheduled post-mortem.
In Harry Potter, Movie Review
Movie Review – Christmas Chronicles 2, The
Movie Review – Christmas Chronicles, The
Movie Review – Wonder Woman 1984
© 2021 Fernby Films
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1030
|
__label__wiki
| 0.785708
| 0.785708
|
For information 405.535.6943 or info@fieldhousemedia.net
Withdrawal Agreement Task Force 50
December 21, 2020 December 21, 2020 admin
What`s going on now? The European Council will have to adopt the EU draft for the negotiation of a possible new agreement. The existing agreement – the withdrawal agreement – came into force on 1 February 2020. Under the withdrawal agreement, there is a transitional period until 31 December 2020. This transition period may be longer than at the end of this year, but the UK is expected to apply for an extension and the UK has said it will not do so. In addition, the United Kingdom has passed legislation through national legislation to say that it may not seek an extension. The EU, for its part, says that negotiating such a huge and unprecedented deal in less than 11 months would be quite a challenge. If passed, the bill would be an “extremely serious violation” of the withdrawal agreement and international law. The withdrawal agreement would enter into force on 1 February 2020 at 00:00 (GMT-1). On 29 March 2017, Theresa May, then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, wrote to european Council President Donald Tusk triggering Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, triggering the process for a member state to leave the EU. The Article 50 procedure provides for a two-year period for the negotiation of a withdrawal agreement which should take into account future relations between the EU and the outgoing Member State. At the request of the United Kingdom, the Article 50 deadline was finally extended until 31 January 2020. On 17 October 2019, the EU and the UK agreed on the text of a withdrawal agreement, which was unanimously approved by the European Council. The Special Protocol for Northern Ireland attached to the Withdrawal Agreement guarantees the integrity of the EU internal market; at the same time, it ensures that there are no controls at the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland and that the Good Friday Agreement remains fully in force.
The protocol provides that Northern Ireland remains part of the UK`s customs territory, but that all relevant provisions of the EU internal market apply in Northern Ireland, as does the EU customs code. Checks and customs collection will be carried out at ports of entry on the Irish island of Innordirland. The EU expressed hope that the UK would publish its draft agreement. The good news is that the parties have two issues: equal conditions of competition and fishing. The bad news is that the parties seem to have two different views on what has been accomplished. It is always possible for the parties to reach an agreement. It is quite possible that the UK will accept in a level playing field and the EU will make concessions in the fishing sector. Objective observers can find out who would get the biggest business. This is no different from the position of Switzerland, which is constantly negotiating agreements with the EU.
Could not resolve host: urls.api.twitter.com
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1031
|
__label__wiki
| 0.545323
| 0.545323
|
Top 3 Money Transfer Providers for UK to Kuwait
TorFX KWD 4,093.19 No Fee 0.4093 1-3 days more...
OFX (UK) KWD 4,076.74 No Fee 0.4077 1-3 days more...
Moneycorp KWD 4,026.55 No Fee 0.4027 1-3 days more...
There are no exchange controls in the UK for the pound sterling (GBP), and transferring money to the UK and sending money from the UK is very easy Read More
The Kuwaiti dinar (KWD) is a fully convertible currency, and money can be transferred to Kuwait and transferred from Kuwait with relatively few restrictions Read More
Transfer Money to UK
Kuwait Money Transfer Guide
Daniel is Founder and CEO of FXcompared and FXC Intelligence and has 18 years of experience in the international finance world focusing on cross-border payments, technology and the property sectors. Daniel is widely quoted as an expert within the money transfer industry including by The Economist, The Wall Street Journal, Reuters, CNBC and Bloomberg. Daniel is passionate about helping consumers and businesses find the best and most efficient ways to transfer money internationally.
Kuwait’s money transfer regulations
Kuwait’s regulatory authority
Kuwait’s economic background
Kuwait to Individual Country Guides
The Kuwaiti dinar (KWD) is a fully convertible currency, and money can be transferred to Kuwait and transferred from Kuwait with relatively few restrictions. While foreign currency exchange is unrestricted, several constraints remain on foreign investment which has led to very low levels of FDI compared to its regional neighbors.
Kuwait allows for the free movement of cash transfers and repatriation of investment capital, profits, interest, dividends, royalties and personal savings. Eleven domestic banks and 12 foreign bank operations from countries in the Gulf, as well as China, Europe and North America are currently licenced to operate by the Central Bank of Kuwait (CBK), as well as 39 foreign currency exchange businesses.
Foreign ownership of business, however, is generally severely restricted; Kuwait receives the lowest amount of foreign direct investment (FDI) in the Middle East and North African region and is the lowest-ranked GCC country in the World Banks 2014 Doing Business report. The primary obstacles include bureaucratic red tape, lengthy procedures for new business creation, and the fact that foreign firms are barred from direct involvement in the petroleum and real estate sectors. Efforts are underway to ease foreign investment conditions, however, and 100% foreign ownership is permitted in certain sectors, including utilities, infrastructure, insurance, IT, tourism, and pharmaceuticals.
The CBK is responsible for monitoring and preserving the health of the financial system. The CBK sets and implements monetary policy, regulates the banking sector, and monitors the foreign exchange market in an effort to maintain price stability.
Kuwait is also a member of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), a regional body that promotes political and economic integration among its six member states, which also include Qatar, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Saudi Arabia and Oman. Kuwait is the only GCC country whose currency is not pegged to the US dollar (USD). Instead, the Kuwaiti dinar is held on a managed float and referenced to a weighted basket of currencies. The exact makeup of the basket is undisclosed, but consists of the currencies of Kuwaits primary trade and financial partners. The basket is heavily dominated by the US dollar.
The GCC Monetary Council, headquartered in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, provides a forum for member countries to discuss and coordinate monetary policy. A project to create a GCC monetary union and common currency has been proposed numerous times, but has seen little real progress. The UAE and Oman indicated in 2013 that they would not take part in the most recent iteration of the project, and no changes are expected on this front in the near-term.
The small Gulf nation of Kuwait punches above its weight in the global economy thanks to its significant oil and gas resources and the vast sums of foreign exchange their exports generate.Like most oil-rich countries in the region, Kuwaits economy relies heavily on foreign workers, who, with the exception of a handful of engineering or finance professionals are overwhelmingly low-skilled workers from Asia. The Kuwait Public Authority for Civil Information estimated in July 2014 that expatriates made up 69% of the countrys nearly 4m population.
The Kuwaiti dinar (KWD), consists of 1,000 fils. The Central Bank of Kuwait issues banknotes in denominations of 250 fils and 50 fils, as well as 1, 5, 10, and 20 dinars. Coins are issued with values of 1, 5, 10, 20 and 50 fils and one dinar.
Transfer Money Kuwait to India
Fee:No Fees on all transfers. ?
Exchange Rate:N/a ?
Fee:Special pricing available and shown for NEW customers via FXcompared ?
Fee:No Fees via FXcompared ?
OFX (UK)
OFX (previously UKForex in the UK), provides secure and speedy international money transfers to over 300,000 people in 55 currencies at better-than-bank rates
OFX (UK) Review
Fee:No OFX fees for FXcompared users. ?
Bank Partner: ? Barclays, SEB
Leveraging 17 years of expertise in international currency exchange, we offer best-in-class service and assistance 24/5.
Fee:No Fees ?
Currency Solutions
Currency exchange specialists ranking No.1 on Trustpilot for the past two years
Currency Solutions Review
Fee:£10 below £5,000 ?
Bank Partner: ? RBS
Country specialists for Brazil and Spain money transfers
Fee:£4 below £5,000 ?
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1036
|
__label__wiki
| 0.891337
| 0.891337
|
Through the Gates of Ennui: Sharing Timmis and Fierro's "The Silver Key" Adaption
Fans of HP Lovecraft know that film adaptations of HP Lovecraft stories have a shaky history at best. Scads of tales have been adapted, but very few have been remotely watchable. The only real gem of the bunch is the silent version of "The Call of Cthulhu" produced by the H.P. Lovecraft Historical Society. The film is well done and captures the haunting tones of Lovecraft's story by rejecting any impulse to modernize the narrative or special effects. The Historical Society produced the film not only as a period piece, they produced the film "as if" it had been produced in 1926. In doing so, they created a genuinely enjoyable and powerful work. I look forward to seeing their to eventually be completed adaptation of "The Whisperer in Darkness."
Making films of successful and haunting Lovecraftian tales is difficult enough, but how difficult would it be to adapt a tale that is at its core problematic? Conor Timmis and Gary Fierro are two independent filmmakers who were brave enough to answer this question with their adaptation of "The Silver Key" entitled "The Silver Key." Cthulhu aficionado Ken Hite has said of what makes the tale so problematic, it's lack of true dread, "even Lovecraft didn't believe that "the oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is apathy," which is why there's a thriving horror literature, and tales of ennui are rapidly forgotten, dei gratia."
"The Silver Key" is a tale of ennui and not horror, but then again that seems to make it perfect for indie film fare.
The ten minute film is, like the HPLHS film, a silent film, but in this case they have updated the setting to the modern day. The use of daylight during the opening sequences of the film remove any weighty emotion introspection of the Randolf Carter character, haunting obsessive desires to retreat into childhood are better displayed at night, but the choice is a much less expensive choice than filming at night. There is a nice transition from bright to overcast/gloomy as the film progresses and couple of good uses of digital effects. One does wonder what the Yellow Sign is doing in the story, is the director implying that retreat into childhood leads to madness? The film runs 10 minutes. What do you think of it as an adaptation of this story?
By Christian Lindke at March 19, 2010
Labels: Games, Gaming, Kenneth Hite, Lovecraft, Movies
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1038
|
__label__cc
| 0.554706
| 0.445294
|
Trabeculectomy (guarded filtration procedure) with tissue re-enforcement
An ocular implant (10) is disclosed for beneficially inhibiting wound healing, inflammation, and devastating infection following a guarded filtration procedure. The implant (10) is comprised of a thin implantable material contoured to fit the eye. During a guarded filtration procedure, the implant (10) is positioned at the edge of the sclerectomy site, under the scleral flap (7), and extends laterally and posteriorly from the sclerectomy site. The implant (10) significantly inhibits adhesion and scarring at the surgical site, and eliminates the need for anti-scarring medications, thereby reducing the risk of blinding infections.
Weiner, Asher (W Bloomfield, MI, US)
WEINER ASHER
623/4.1
A61F2/14; A61F2/16; A61F; (IPC1-7): A61F2/14
20080208351 Biocompatible Material for Surgical Implants and Cell Guiding Tissue Culture Surfaces August, 2008 Besenbacher et al.
20100100177 Multifocal Intraocular Lens April, 2010 Zhao
20080021557 Spinal motion-preserving implants January, 2008 Trieu
20090182428 FLANGED INTERBODY DEVICE July, 2009 Mcclellan III et al.
20070179622 METHODS OF PRODUCING PVA HYDROGEL IMPLANTS AND RELATED DEVICES August, 2007 Denoziere et al.
20080140185 Biodegradable and Biocompatible Peg-Based Poly(Ester-Urethanes) June, 2008 Kiser et al.
20080033538 IMPLANT MADE OF A BIOCORRODIBLE METALLIC MATERIAL HAVING A COATING MADE OF AN ORGANOSILICON COMPOUND February, 2008 Borck et al.
20050273165 Soft tissue spacer December, 2005 Griffiths et al.
20060136065 Radially compressed dehydrated spinal nucleus implants June, 2006 Gontarz et al.
20090264977 Family of Electrodes for Use in Performing in Situ Fenestration Using a Plasma RF Catheter October, 2009 Bruszewski et al.
20010014821 BALLOON CATHETER AND STENT DELIVERY SYSTEM HAVING ENHANCED STENT RETENTION August, 2001 Juman et al.
MATTHEWS, WILLIAM H
Morgan & Finnegan Transition Team (Boston, MA, US)
1. An ocular implant comprising implantable-grade material that inhibits adhesion and scarring of eye tissue following a guarded filtration procedure.
2. The ocular implant according to claim 1 wherein the implantable-grade material is silicone.
3. The ocular implant according to claim 1 wherein the implantable-grade material is methylmetacrylate.
4. The ocular implant according to claim 1 wherein the implantable-grade material is any biocompatible material to which tissues do not adhere.
5. A kit comprising the ocular implant according to claim 1.
6. A method for inhibiting adhesion and scarring following a guarded filtration procedure comprising positioning an ocular implant made of implantable-grade material at the edge of the sclerectomy site, under and around the scleral flap, such that said implant extends laterally and posteriorly from the sclerectomy site.
7. The method according to claim 6 wherein the implantable-grade material is silicone.
8. The method according to claim 6 wherein the implantable-grade material is methylmetacrylate.
9. The method according to claim 6 wherein the implantable-grade material is any biocompatible material to which tissues do not adhere.
TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to ocular implants, and, more specifically, to improved methods and devices useful in performing a trabeculectomy or guarded filtration procedure (GFP), that beneficially inhibit wound healing, inflammation, infection, and scarring following a guarded filtration procedure.
Glaucoma is a progressive eye disease, which affects millions of adults each year. If left untreated, glaucoma causes partial or total blindness, and is among the leading causes of blindness in all countries. Glaucoma occurs when the pressure inside the eye rises above safe levels due to poor drainage or blockage of the aqueous (the fluid produced inside the eye) outflow channel, or due to increases in venous pressure outside of the eye. The increased intraocular pressure damages the tissues in the eye, especially the optic nerve, which eventually causes blindness.
One method for treating progressing glaucoma is a trabeculectomy (also referred to as guarded filtration procedure (GFP)). In traditional guarded filtration surgery, the sclera is exposed, and a scleral flap is dissected in the scleral tissue. The scleral flap is elevated and pulled forward to reveal a bed of scleral tissue under the flap. An incision (referred to as a sclerectomy) is made through the scleral bed to create a “window” or fistula into the anterior chamber of the eye, which allows the aqueous (the fluid produced in the eye) to flow out of the anterior chamber, thereby alleviating the intraocular pressure. The scleral flap is sutured over the fistula, creating a small space under the flap which allows the aqueous to drain from the eye, yet provides enough resistance so that excess aqueous does not escape, thus reducing the risk of hypotony.
A major problem with filtration surgery in general is the eye's own natural wound healing response, which causes the fistula to close or otherwise heal too rapidly, which, in turn, causes the filtration (i.e. drainage) to fail. Attempts to overcome this problem have included inserting ophthalmic devices such as tubes, valves, or shunts into the fistula in order to maintain the fistula open. These conventional drainage devices have been widely used with varying degrees of success. Examples of such devices are disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,178,604; 5,397,300; 5,868,697; 5,879,319. However, these implants often become clogged, obstructed, or restricted by the proliferation of scar tissue and adherence of the tissue layers, which occur at the surgical site. Most of these implant devices can also cause restriction of eye movement, incapacitating double vision, and eye discomfort. In addition, to counteract the natural healing process and closing of the fistula in filtration surgery, antimetabolite drugs are commonly used in filtration surgery to inhibit the wound healing process. Unfortunately, a major complication of using antimetabolites is that they weaken and thin healthy tissues, increasing the risk of developing a blinding infection by nearly ten-fold.
U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,634,418 and 6,102,045 disclose other types of drainage devices that are constructed of absorptive material that act as wicks or absorb the aqueous which drains from the anterior chamber of the eye to the area beneath the scleral flap. However, these devices do not address the scarring around the scleral flap, which causes guarded filtration procedures to fail.
It is thus one object of the present invention to provide a method and implant for beneficially inhibiting wound healing in the eye that would otherwise cause unwanted closure of the surgical fistula.
It is another object of the present invention to provide an ophthalmic implant made of an appropriate biocompatible material, and of an appropriate size and shape to effectively inhibit unwanted wound healing in the eye following filtration surgery.
It is yet a further object of the present invention to provide a simple method for positioning the implant during a guarded filtration procedure.
BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to trabeculectomy (GFP) with tissue re-enforcement that avoids the need to use antimetabolites or other agents often employed for improving the success rate of glaucoma filtration surgery, while reducing the rate of devastating infection and other complications. The procedure involves the placement of an implant, which acts as a mechanical barrier between the tissues that tend to scar and adhere to one another at the surgical site. Thus, the implant improves the long-term success rate of the filtration procedure, and diminishes post-operative infection rates. The implant is made of implantable-grade material of approximately 7 mm×10 mm dimensions, and is contoured to conform to the globe of the eye.
The method of the present invention, in a preferred embodiment, involves the steps of exposing the sclera, dissecting a scleral flap, performing a sclerectomy, and then securing a thin, implantable-grade biocompatible material such as silicone, methylmetacrylate, or another material to which tissues do not adhere (from henceforth to be referred to as the “implant”), to the posterior sclerectomy edge, under the scleral flap. The implant is secured in several places, as needed, and trimmed to fit the surgical site. The implant extends several millimeters posteriorly and to the sides of the sclerectomy site. Then, the scleral flap is secured to the implant using, for example, non-absorbable sutures. The tightness of the sutures is adjusted to prevent overflow and ocular hypotony, but to allow for a reasonable amount of aqueous to escape from the anterior chamber of the eye (filtration) in an amount sufficient to control the eye pressure. Finally, the conjunctiva and tenon are closed, and antibiotics and steroids are injected under the conjunctiva.
FIGS. 1a through 1d are top views (surgeon's views) of the major eye components and diagrammatically illustrate the steps associated with the positioning of the implant during a guarded filtration procedure.
FIG. 2 is a vertical cross-sectional side view of the eye, illustrating an implant made of a silicone sheet material in place following the guarded filtration procedure.
As noted above, in accordance with the invention, an implantable-grade sheet material is implanted so that it is positioned centrally, along the posterior edge of the sclerectomy site, and extends laterally on both sides over the sclera. The geometry of the implant is fashioned to allow it to conform to the globe of the eye, and to remain affixed to the tissue of the eye (sclera).
One preferred embodiment of the implant, and a method for positioning it on the eye, is illustrated in FIGS. 1a through 1d. The implant 10 is best seen in FIG. 1b, which illustrates an implant after it has been trimmed by the surgeon to fit the surgical site. In this embodiment, the implant has a rectangular base, preferably about 5 mm×10 mm in size, and an anterior extension of approximately 3 mm×5 mm. Of course, the actual dimensions and geometry of the implant sheet 10 will depend on the specific patient including, but not limited to, such factors as the surgical site condition, the amount of scar-free tissues available, and the severity of the glaucoma. The latter is a factor because the size of the implant will determine the size of the aqueous bleb (which contains the aqueous outflow) formed under the conjunctiva and Tenon's capsule (the outermost layers of the eye), thus determining the amount of filtration and the resulting intra-ocular pressure. Therefore, the implant could be trimmed by the surgeon into almost any shape that would achieve the desired effect.
The thickness of the implant is less than 100μ, preferably 25-50μ. The implant should thus be thin enough not to cause an elevated mass under the conjunctiva and Tenon's capsule, but still strong enough to withstand suturing through it without tearing. The “implantable-grade” (i.e. safe and tolerable to the eye tissues) material, such as silicone, for example, is highly flexible due to its thinness, yet equally strong. In a preferred embodiment, the implant is manufactured pre-molded to conform to the average eye globe. For example, the average eye has a diameter of 22 to 24 mm, therefore the radius of curvature of the implant is preferably about 11-14 mm. Other radii of curvature can be manufactured to fit different globes.
Silicone or methylmetacrylate are preferred as possible implant materials because they have been in long-term, widespread use as materials for various types of implants in and around the eye. For example, silicone and acrylic intraocular lens implants to replace the removed cataractous lenses in modern cataract surgery have been in use for many years with excellent safety and tolerability records. Similarly, silicone has been widely used over the years in tube shunts and valves for glaucoma surgery, in periocular bands for retinal detachment surgery, and in orbital fracture bone replacements. However, this invention also contemplates the use of any other biocompatible materials to which tissues do not adhere, and which are equally safe and tolerable for use in the invention. Many of such related materials are also demonstrating excellent safety records as intraocular and periocular implants.
As mentioned above, FIGS. 1a through 1d depict a preferred embodiment of the implant and procedure. In FIG. 1a, following local anesthesia, the Tenon's capsule and conjunctiva 4, covering the sclera 6, are cut from the limbus 3 and retracted backward, to create a fornix-based flap 5 (the fornix forms the cul-de-sac of the conjunctiva, under the lid; the limbus forms the border between the cornea and where the white of the eye begins). GFP can also be performed using a limbus-based flap, where Tenon's capsule and conjunctiva are severed at the upper fornix and dissected and retracted forward until the limbus is reached. The fornix-based Tenon's capsule and conjunctiva flap cannot be seen in FIGS. 1a through 1c, as it is pulled back toward the reader, therefore only the space under the flap, whose border is depicted at 5, revealing the exposed sclera 6, is drawn in FIGS. 1a through 1c for simplicity.
A partial-thickness limbus-based scleral flap 7 (partial thickness refers to a flap that is dissected, for example, two thirds of the way into the sclera, therefore one third of the sclera remains in the flap bed 8) is dissected in the exposed sclera 6 at the limbus 3. The scleral flap is then elevated and pulled forward toward the cornea 1 to expose the scleral bed 8. A sclerectomy (trabeculectomy) is then performed where part of the eye wall is removed in the scleral bed 8, resulting in a “window” or fistula 9 into the anterior chamber of the eye 2. At this point, the aqueous can drain from the anterior chamber of the eye through the sclerectomy, thus lowering the eye pressure.
Referring to FIG. 1b, a thin sheet of an implantable-grade implant 10, preferably, between 25 and 50 μm, is secured at the locations indicated by “X”, centrally at the posterior edge of the scierectomy site, so as not to obstruct the fistula, and lateral to the scleral bed on both sides. As stated earlier, the implant's final size is dependent upon such factors including, but not limited to, the size of the eye, the surgical site conditions, and the amount of scar-free and healthy tissues available. Additionally, the implant has a radius of curvature conforming to the contours of the eye globe. At this stage, the aqueous can still drain from the anterior chamber without resistance.
As shown in FIG. 1c, next the scleral flap is laid down as depicted at 11 to cover the fistula and part of the implant. The scleral flap is secured loosely enough to allow reasonable flow of aqueous from the anterior chamber through the sclerectomy, allowing the relief of excessive intra-ocular pressure. The sutures are nevertheless tight enough to prevent hypotony. The manner of securing the implant, along with the number of sutures used, depends on the degree of filtration and intra-ocular pressure desired. In addition, the posterior and lateral portions of the implant are tucked under the conjunctiva and Tenon's capsule layers, as shown by the dashed lines at 12. Usually, no additional sutures are necessary to secure the implant in those areas. After this point, the implant will prevent scarring and adherence of the scleral flap to the scleral bed, posterior and posterolateral to the sclerectomy site, and will prevent scarring and adherence between the Tenon's capsule and the episclera, the most common cause of failure of filtration with time. As a consequence, filtration will be maintained without the use of complication-causing, anti-scarring antimetabolites such as mitomycin C and 5FU, which are currently in use to prevent scarring.
Finally, as shown in FIG. 1d, the Tenon's capsule and conjunctiva are laid back down so as to completely cover the surgical site, and sutured back to the limbal cornea as shown at 13. The hatched Xs are the covered sutures of the scleral flap and implant which were shown in FIG. 1c. The final sutures are done so that fluid is unable to escape to the “outside world”, thus, rendering the surgical site “water-tight, and restoring the external anatomy of the eye.
FIG. 2 is a vertical, cross-sectional view of the anterior eye, through the surgical site, illustrating the implant in one preferred embodiment as a silicone sheet under the conjunctiva and Tenon's capsule layers, inside the sclera and scleral flap. The scierectomy, as shown, allows the aqueous from the anterior chamber to drain under the scleral flap to the space under the Tenon's capsule and conjunctiva layers, which then forms a fluid-filled “bleb” containing the excess aqueous. The implant prevents the tissues from adhering to one another. Optionally, an iridectomy can be done to prevent the iris from adhering to the sclerectomy and obstructing drainage.
In a recent rabbit study of the GFP (trabeculectomy), GFPs were performed in 14 nonglaucomatous eyes of 7 albino rabbits. In all 7, the right (study) eye underwent a GFP with a 100μ thick, implantable-grade implant made of a silicone sheet that extended from the posterior sclerectomy edge under the scleral flap, to several millimeters posterior and lateral to the scleral flap, under the conjunctiva and Tenon's capsule. GFPs were performed without a silicone implant in all 7 left (control) eyes. During the post-operative follow-up, conjunctival hyperemia and chemosis, anterior chamber reaction and lacrimation were graded. At the end of the follow-up period, 14-91 days following surgery, intra-ocular pressure (IOP) was measured with a Tonopen and the rabbits were sacrificed.
All 7 (100%) study eyes (GFP, with silicone implant) demonstrated a bleb at the end of the follow-up period, compared to only 1 of 7 (14.3%) control (GFP alone) eyes (p=0.001). IOP was lower in the study eyes compared to control eyes (8.3±1.8 mmHg vs. 10.6±1.3 mmHg, p+0.047). Hyperemia and chemosis scores were lower in the study eyes compared to control eyes (hyperemia: 0.94±0.74 vs. 1.33±0.86, p=0.001; Chemosis: 0.561±0.50 vs. 0.77±0.57, p=0.004). Anterior chamber reaction and lacrimation scores were similar in study and control eyes. Thus, implant implantation increases GFP success rate in albino rabbits.
Although the invention has been described with reference to specific embodiments, the description is intended to be illustrative of the invention and is not intended to be limiting. Various modifications and applications may occur to those skilled in the art without departing from the true spirit and scope of the invention as defined in the appended claims.
Previous Patent: Prosthetic heart valve sizer assembly with flexible sizer body
Next Patent: Accommodative intracapsular implant
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1045
|
__label__wiki
| 0.522454
| 0.522454
|
EXPLOSIVE DEVICE COUNTERMEASURES
A method and system for mitigating the effectiveness of IEDs are disclosed. The method can include detecting IEDs by sensing the presence of a non-linear electronic component of an IED. The presence of a non-linear electronic component of the IED can be detected by illuminating the device with a high power microwave signal containing a plurality of radio frequencies of electromagnetic radiation and receiving sum and/or difference frequency components that are produced by interaction of the illuminating signals with a non-linear IED component and subsequently re-radiated.
Schultz, Eugene M. (St. Louis, MO, US)
Curry, Randy D. (Columbia, MO, US)
Curry, Richard A. (Florissant, MO, US)
G01R23/02; G06F15/00
20100057465 VARIABLE TEXT-TO-SPEECH FOR AUTOMOTIVE APPLICATION March, 2010 Kirsch et al.
20090164145 Method and apparatus for spindle stiffness and/or damping in a fluid dynamic bearing spindle motor used in a hard disk drive June, 2009 Koo et al.
20070027593 Predictive monitoring for vehicle efficiency and maintenance February, 2007 Shah et al.
20080040075 System, Method And Software Program For Managing, Documenting And Analyzing Water Damage Restoration Procedures February, 2008 Fillmann
20070016350 Apparatus and method for FNR calibration and testing neutral safety switch thresholds in an agricultural windrower January, 2007 Fackler et al.
20090090870 DETECTOR RESPONSE MODELING April, 2009 Ahnesjo et al.
20090210186 Operating Method for a Sensor and a Control Facility Communicating With the Sensor August, 2009 Siess
20080140330 SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE YIELD PREDICTION SYSTEM AND METHOD June, 2008 Morioka et al.
20060014164 Computer software to assist in identifying SNPS with microarrays January, 2006 Molla et al.
20070059781 System for size based separation and analysis March, 2007 Kapur et al.
20090138209 PROGNOSTIC APPARATUS, AND PROGNOSTIC METHOD May, 2009 Maruhashi et al.
BARBEE, MANUEL L
HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP (70186) (Dallas, TX, US)
1. A method for mitigating effectiveness of an improvised explosive device (IED), the method comprising: detecting a presence of the IED by detecting a presence of a non-linear electronic component of the IED, wherein detecting the presence of the non-linear component of the IED comprises: illuminating the IED with a first signal containing a first plurality of frequencies and having a comparatively wide beam, and receiving a first complex signal return including at least one of sum or difference frequencies or harmonics produced by interaction of the first signal with one or more of the IED's non-linear components; in response to detecting the presence of the IED, verifying the presence of the IED by determining whether a signature of the first complex signal return is consistent with expected IED signatures; in response to verifying the presence of the IED, determining a location of the IED by: illuminating the IED with a second signal containing a second plurality of frequencies and having a comparatively narrow beam, receiving a second complex signal return including at least one of sum or difference frequencies or harmonics produced by interaction of the second signal with one or more of the IED's non-linear components, wherein the second plurality of frequencies are higher than the first plurality of frequencies, and determining a round-trip propagation time of the second signal and the second complex signal return; and in response to determining the location of the IED, disabling the IED by directing a burst of electromagnetic radiation to the determined location of the IED.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the frequencies of the first signal comprise at least two frequencies of microwave radiation.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the verifying comprises comparing at least one of sum or difference frequencies or harmonics of the first complex signal with stored signature data in order to confirm detection of the IED.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the frequencies of the second signal comprise at least two frequencies of microwave radiation, wherein the second signal is transmitted by a narrow beam antenna.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the second complex signal is a microwave signal, wherein the receiving the second complex signal is performed using a narrow receive beam.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the receiving the second complex signal comprises receiving microwave re-radiated energy, wherein the determining the location of the IED comprises using a highest available frequency component of the re-radiated energy.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the disabling the IED comprises illuminating the IED with a burst of comparatively higher power microwave radiation using a comparatively narrow beam antenna.
8. A system for mitigating effectiveness of an improvised explosive device (IED), the system comprising: a first transmitter and a first transmit antenna for illuminating the IED with a first signal containing a first plurality of frequencies and having a comparatively wide beam; a first receiver and a first receive antenna for receiving a first complex signal return including at least one of sum or difference frequencies or harmonics produced by interaction of the first signal with one or more of the IED's non-linear components to detect a presence of the IED; a detection verification system for verifying a presence of the IED in response to the detected presence of the IED based on whether a signature of the first complex signal return is consistent with expected IED signatures; a second transmitter and a second transmit antenna for illuminating the IED with a second signal containing a second plurality of frequencies and having a comparatively narrow beam; a second receiver and a second receive antenna for receiving a second complex signal return including at least one of sum or difference frequencies or harmonics produced by interaction of the second signal with one or more of the IED's non-linear components to determine a round-trip propagation time of the second signal and the second complex signal return and a location of the IED in response to the verified presence of the IED, wherein the second plurality of frequencies are higher than the first plurality of frequencies; and a third transmitter and a third transmit antenna for disabling the IED in response to the determined location of the IED by directing a burst of electromagnetic radiation to the determined location of the IED.
9. The system of claim 8, wherein the first transmitter is a microwave transmitter.
10. The system of claim 8, wherein the first transmitter is a dual band microwave transmitter.
11. The system of claim 8, wherein the first transmitter is a high power microwave transmitter.
12. The system of claim 8, wherein the first transmitter is a wide beam microwave transmitter.
13. The system of claim 8, wherein the first receiver is tuned to a specific frequency component of a re-radiated signal from the IED.
14. The system of claim 8, wherein the third transmitter is a high power burst transmitter for rendering IEDs ineffective.
15. The system of claim 8, wherein the third transmitter is a high power microwave burst transmitter for rendering IEDs ineffective.
16. The system of claim 8, wherein the second antenna has a relatively narrow beam.
17. The system of claim 8, wherein the first antenna has a relatively wide beam.
18. The system of claim 8, wherein the first, second, and third transmit antennas and the first and second receive antennas are dedicated antennas.
19. The system of claim 8, wherein two or more of the first, second, and third transmit antennas and the first and second receive antennas are shared antennas.
20. The system of claim 8, wherein the first, second, and third transmitters and the first and second receivers are dedicated transmitters and receivers.
21. The system of claim 8, wherein two or more of the first, second, and third transmitters and the first and second receivers are shared transceivers.
22. A system for locating an improvised explosive device (IED), the system comprising: means for detecting a presence of the IED by detecting a presence of a non-linear electronic component of the IED, the detecting means comprising: means for illuminating the IED with a first signal containing a first plurality of frequencies and having a comparatively wide beam, and means for receiving a first complex signal return including at least one of sum or difference frequencies or harmonics produced by interaction of the first signal with one or more of the IED's non-linear components; means for verifying the presence of the IED by determining whether a signature of the first complex signal return is consistent with expected IED signatures in response to the detecting means; means for determining a location of the IED in response to the verifying means, the determining means comprising: means for illuminating the IED with a second signal containing a second plurality of frequencies and having a comparatively narrow beam, means for receiving a second complex signal return including at least one of sum or difference frequencies or harmonics produced by interaction of the second signal with one or more of the IED's non-linear components, wherein the second plurality of frequencies are higher than the first plurality of frequencies, and means for determining a round-trip propagation time of the second signal and the second complex signal return; and means for disabling the IED by directing a burst of electromagnetic radiation to the determined location of the IED in response to the determining means.
This application is a continuation of and claims the benefit of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/393,386 filed Mar. 30, 2006 which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
The present invention relates generally to microwave electronics and, more particularly, to a method and system for detecting, locating, disabling and/or destroying Improvised Explosive Devices(IEDs), such as by using high power microwaves.
IEDs are used to injure or kill people and to damage vehicles and other equipment. IEDs can be fashioned as roadside bombs that are detonated when a vehicle passes nearby. IEDs can be elevated, such as by placing them upon road signs or trees, so as to more effectively focus their energy on less armored portions of a vehicle. They can also be buried or partially buried in order to make them more difficult to find.
IEDs are typically constructed from artillery or mortar shells. They can also be made from explosives from a wide range of other sources. In many cases a detonator is attached so as to facilitate initiation of the explosion. The detonator can be remotely controlled by cellular telephone, radio, garage door opener or another electronic device. By using such electronic devices, the IED can be remotely detonated via either a manned trigger command or the use of automated fusing, e.g., by sensing the proximity of a vehicle.
The use of such IEDs by insurgents in Iraq has become commonplace. Indeed, it has been estimated that IEDs have, to date, accounted for a significant fraction of the coalition deaths in Iraq. Consequently, it would be beneficial to be able to detect, locate, disable and destroy IEDs such as those used by insurgents as roadside bombs in Iraq.
Systems and methods are disclosed herein to provide for mitigating the effectiveness of IEDs. One or more embodiments of the present invention comprise detection of an IED by sensing the presence of non-linear electronic component(s) used in the IED's construction.
Detecting the presence of a non-linear electronic component of the IED can be accomplished by simultaneously illuminating the device with multiple radio frequency (RF) electromagnetic signals and receiving a complex RF signal return which contains sum and/or difference frequencies and/or harmonics that are produced by interaction of the illumination signals with one or more of the IED's non-linear components.
Illuminating the IED with RF electromagnetic radiation can be accomplished by employing two narrow band RF signal sources. Alternatively, illuminating the IED with RF electromagnetic radiation can employ three, four, five, six or more narrow band RF sources. Additionally, one or more of the illuminating RF sources may employ wideband (WB) or ultra wideband (UWB) waveforms.
According to one embodiment of the present invention, the received complex signal re-radiated from the IED non-linear circuit(s), containing sum and/or difference frequencies, can be compared with stored signature data to confirm the detection of an IED. In this manner, false positives (false indications that an IED has been detected) are greatly reduced.
The location of the IED can be more precisely determined by illuminating it using a narrow beamwidth transmit-receive microwave system whose azimuth & elevation angles are well known versus time. Two or more options are possible. A first option comprises transmitting two or more relatively low frequency illuminating signals using fixed wide-beamwidth antennas. A higher frequency signal, i.e., the re-radiated sum frequency signal with or without harmonic content, can be captured using a narrower beamwidth antenna operating at a higher, e.g., sum, frequency.
A second option comprises using synchronized scanning transmit/receive antennas, wherein one set uses lower frequencies and another set uses higher frequencies. In the second option, the higher frequency transmit or receive antenna would be used as the primary source for determining IED position. For either option, IED position knowledge can be enhanced by employing a combination of information including the slant range to detected IED using the multi-frequency round trip propagation time from RF source to IED and the position of the illuminating platform obtained from aircraft Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) information and/or the location of the terrain and its features/buildings obtained from previously stored location and/or signature data bases.
The IED can be disabled and/or destroyed by illuminating the device with a burst of comparatively higher power RF electromagnetic radiation. This can be done using a narrower beam antenna coupled to the illuminating RF source.
Thus, detecting the presence of non-linear electronic components of IEDs can be implemented by simultaneously illuminating the IED with two or more transmitted RF signals and receiving resultant, identifiable sum/difference complex signals whose spectral signatures are know. Determining the location of the IED can make use of knowledge of the azimuth/elevation of the narrowest beamwidth transmit/receive antenna in conjunction with precise pointing angles of the narrow beamwidth antenna, the round trip propagation time aircraft-to-IED and the GPS coordinates of the illuminating aircraft/antenna. Disabling the IED can be accomplished by illuminating the device with a burst of comparatively higher power microwave radiation using a comparatively narrow beam RF source/antenna.
Even the comparatively lower power RF sources used for detection can employ high power RF sources. These RF sources can merely be lower in power than the RF sources used to disable or destroy the IED.
In one or more embodiments of the present invention, a system for mitigating the effectiveness of IEDs can comprise one RF transmitter using a plurality of radio frequencies radiated towards the implanted device such that the radio frequency return generated by a non-linear component in the IED can contain complex recognizable signals and can be re-radiated back towards the illuminating aircraft. The counter-IED system can also include a receiver for detecting the complex radio frequency IED re-radiated return. The azimuth/elevation angles of the higher frequency transmit/receive antenna can be used to locate the IED in conjunction with other available aircraft/surface data, e.g., aircraft GPS-determined location, terrain features/locations, etc. Reception of the return, particularly if verified, is an indication that an IED has been detected. Once such an indication that an IED has been detected is obtained, then procedures can be implemented to render the IED ineffective.
According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, the system can employ a high power burst transmitter for rendering IEDs ineffective. The high power burst transmitter can either disable or destroy the IED. In either instance, the IED is rendered ineffective.
First and second transmit signals can use narrow band dual frequency, high power microwave illuminating transmitters. A second transmitter can use narrow band, wideband (WB) or Ultra-Wideband (UWB) signals. The highest frequency transmit/receive antenna can have the narrowest beamwidth and can be employed for IED location determination. The burst transmitter can use a high power microwave (HPM) RF source and a narrow beam transmit antenna.
The electromagnetic radiation used to detect, locate, disable and/or destroy an IED can employ microwave electromagnetic radiation. The frequency content of the illuminating signal(s) used for detection, location and disablement or destruction respectively can be the same as one another or vary depending on desired functionality. For example, one pair of frequencies can be used for detection, a different pair can be used for location and one of the two frequencies used for location can be used for disablement or destruction.
The scope of the invention is defined by the claims, which are incorporated into this section by reference. A more complete understanding of embodiments of the present invention is available to those skilled in the art, as well as a realization of additional advantages thereof, by a consideration of the following detailed description of one or more embodiments. Reference can be made to the appended sheets of drawings that can first be described briefly.
FIG. 1 shows a schematic diagram illustrating the use of an IED countermeasures system in accordance with an exemplary embodiment of the present invention, wherein a wide beam, dual band, high power microwave transmission is being broadcast to determine if an IED is present;
FIG. 2 shows a schematic diagram further illustrating the use of the IED countermeasures system of FIG. 1, wherein a higher frequency narrow beam (transmit/receive) antenna is being used to determine the location of an IED;
FIG. 3 shows a schematic diagram further illustrating the use of the IED countermeasures system of FIG. 1, wherein a narrow beam (such as a dual band narrow beam), high power, microwave burst is being transmitted to disable the IED;
FIG. 4 shows a block diagram illustrating use of the IED countermeasures system in accordance with an exemplary embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 5 shows a block diagram illustrating an IED countermeasures system in accordance with an exemplary embodiment of the present invention; and
FIG. 6 shows a flow chart illustrating operation of the IED countermeasures system defined in FIG. 5.
Embodiments of the present invention and their advantages are best understood by referring to the detailed description that follows. It should be understood that like reference numerals are used to identify like elements illustrated in one or more of the figures.
Contemporary electronic devices almost universally contain non-linear electronic components. Examples of non-linear electronic components include diodes and transistors. Thus, the cellular telephones, radios, garage door openers, or other electronic devices used in the detonators of IEDs typically contain non-linear electronic components.
Such non-linear electronic components tend to function as inefficient radio frequency mixers when illuminated with two or more frequencies of RF electromagnetic radiation. When the non-linear electronic components function as radio frequency mixers, they produce harmonics of the illumination frequencies, as well as sum and difference frequencies of the illumination frequencies. These harmonics, sum, and difference frequencies are re-radiated and can be detected, e.g., received and recognized. Generally, the sum and difference frequencies are of greater amplitude as compared to the harmonic frequencies, and thus are often easier to detect.
As used herein, the term “detecting” can refer to the process of determining that an IED is likely to be present in the general direction of illumination. The term “locating” can refer to more precisely determining where the IED has been placed. The term “disabling” can refer to rendering the IED ineffective, such as by inhibiting its ability to be remotely detonated, i.e., dudding. The term “destroying” refers to exploding or partially exploding the IED.
According to one embodiment of the present invention, an IED can be detected by illuminating an area using a multi-frequency, high power microwave (HPM) RF transmitter/antenna. When the IED is illuminated by the multi-frequency HPM transmitter, sum and difference frequencies and/or harmonics of the transmitted frequency are generated by interacting with non-linear circuits included in the IED. These transformed RF signals are re-radiated from the IED towards the illuminating HPM RF source and received through an antenna located on the transmitting platform.
The receive antenna operates at the sum/difference frequency(s) and feeds a receiver tuned to the transformed signal spectrum. After detecting, the presence of an IED, its presence can be verified by determining if the characteristics of the re-radiated signal corresponding to likely device signatures. After being verified, the location of the IED can be more precisely found by determining the azimuth and elevation angles of the highest frequency, e.g., narrowest beam, transmit/receive antenna, as well as the round-trip propagation time from the transmitter to the IED and back to a receiver. This gives the location of the IED relative to the HPM platform. The location of the HPM system platform can be determined via the platforms GPS coordinates and/or the surface features of the terrain.
Further, according to one embodiment of the present invention, an IED can be disabled or destroyed by illuminating it with a burst of high power microwave radiation. These processes are described, with reference to the figures, in further detail below.
FIGS. 1-3 show the use of an IED countermeasures system (with multiple HPM system beam shapes) that has been installed in a rotorcraft 11 (in the illustrated case, a tilt-wing aircraft is shown whose wings can rotate so as to provide operation like that of both an airplane and a helicopter). Alternatively, a fixed wing aircraft, a helicopter, or any other airborne vehicle can be used. However, a slower speed aircraft may be more effective for this application since flying at a slower speed illuminates the IED for a longer period of time, thus resulting in improved detection and destruction effects.
FIG. 1 shows rotorcraft 11 flying along a road 13 with mountains 15 in the background. A convoy 14 is traveling upon road 13. As discussed above, IEDs are commonly used as roadside bombs against such targets as a convoy 14.
The aircraft can serve as a platform for all components of the improvised explosive countermeasures system of the present invention. That platform can contain all of the transmitters, receivers and other equipments associated with the improvised explosive countermeasures system. It is possible that multiple aircraft can be used, with each aircraft having a portion of the improvised explosive countermeasures system. The aircraft can be piloted, remotely controlled, or completely autonomous, or any desired combination of piloted, remotely controlled, and completely autonomous aircraft can be used. A multiple aircraft counter-IED system can be more complex than a single aircraft counter-IED system, since both time of transmission/reception, angle of transmission/reception and multiple aircraft location can need to be synchronized when more than one platform is employed.
By installing such countermeasures systems on a rotorcraft or other airborne vehicle, both locating the IED and rendering it ineffective can be performed from the same platform and at a safe range. Alternatively, IEDs can be located and/or rendered ineffective using countermeasures systems installed in land based vehicles. Indeed, some countermeasures functions can be performed from airborne platforms and other countermeasures functions can be performed from land based platforms.
For example, the detection and location of IEDs can be performed from airborne platforms and rendering ineffective can be performed from land based platforms, or visa-versa. However, a more robust airborne detection/disablement HPM system is preferred in order to maximize the size of the territory searched and/or cleared of IEDs and so as to minimize damage from exploding ground embedded IEDs
Rotocraft 11 can broadcast multi-frequency high power microwave radiation (such as via transmitter 150 and antenna 151 of FIG. 5) using a relatively wide antenna beam (such as beam 12 of FIG. 1). The wide antenna beam is used to illuminate the suspected area where it is believed that one or more IEDs have been placed. The use of a wide transmit antenna beam increases the coverage of the broadcast microwave radiation.
When wide beam 12 is incident upon an IED, multiple frequencies are mixed, albeit inefficiently, by one or more non-linear electronic component of the device's electronic circuitry. The resulting harmonics, sum, and difference frequencies are re-radiated and can be detected by the IED countermeasures system receiver of the present invention. That is, a microwave receiver (receiver 153 of FIG. 5) can be configured to receive these re-radiated frequencies.
When such re-radiated frequencies are detected, the presence of an IED can be verified 154 (FIG. 5). Such verification can be performed by ascertaining whether or not the re-radiated RF spectrum is consistent with signatures of laboratory or field illuminated IEDs. For example, the re-radiated frequencies can be compared to known signatures of IEDs that have been illuminated in laboratory and/or field tests. and the data then stored in a computer database (such as per block 154 of FIG. 5) for use on an airborne IED countermeasures platform.
In this manner, rotocraft 11 can illuminate a large area with a multi-frequency wide beam width (per block 151 of FIG. 5) high power microwave transmitter 150. For example, rotocraft 11 can fly along a highway that is about to be traversed by a convoy 14 and can provide IED detection, location and IED-disabling countermeasures for convoy 14.
FIG. 2 shows the rotocraft 11 of FIG. 1 functioning as the IED countermeasures system. It is being used to better determine the location of an IED, after the IEDs presence has been verified. To better determine the location of the IED, the higher frequency, narrow beam transmitter/receiver antenna that processes the high power microwave radiation can be used to more precisely determine the azimuth and elevation angles from the air platform to the ground emplaced IED. The round-trip propagation time (transmitter to IED and back to receiver platform) can be used to establish the slant range to the IED and GPS position information can precisely locate the position of the illuminating air platform
As those skilled in the art can appreciate, the use of narrow beam 21 allows position of the IED to be determined more precisely. This is true because when a return from the IED is received, the device must be within the smaller angular region covered by narrow beam 21 (as opposed to the larger area covered by wide beam 12). Thus, narrow beam 21 can be used to better locate the IED.
The Global Positioning System (GPS) and/or other positioning and/or navigation systems can be used to project coordinates of the IED for subsequent countermeasure processing or for future reference. For example, these coordinates can be used by the same rotocraft 11, another rotocraft, or an altogether different type of vehicle (such as a land base vehicle, e.g., a truck) to render the IED ineffective.
FIG. 3 shows the rotocraft 11 of FIG. 1 as the IED countermeasures system thereof is being used to disable or destroy the IED. A narrow beam, high power microwave burst 31 can be directed toward the IED after its location has been established.
Either a single frequency or multiple frequencies can be transmitted in the burst. Information from the verification process can be used to determine the likelihood that the counter-IED system of the present invention can have the desired affect upon the IED. That is, the database of known IED re-radiated signatures contains information regarding the spectral content of the re-radiated signal from the IED and thus can be used to establish the likelihood that the countermeasure system can be used to render the IED ineffective. The database can contain information regarding the most effective frequency or frequencies for use in the burst.
Burst 31 of high power microwave radiation can cause malfunctioning of electronic devices, such as cellular telephones, radios, or garage door openers that are used to detonate the IED. Such malfunctioning can result in the inability to subsequently remotely control detonation (i.e. ‘duding’) of the IED, thereby rendering it ineffective. Such malfunctioning can also result in the premature detonation of the IED (that is, it can be detonated before convoy 14 is close enough to cause injury, death, or damage).
FIG. 4 is a block diagram illustrating operation of the IED countermeasures system of one or more embodiments of the present invention. As shown, two high power microwave sources, 41 and 45, each provide a different center frequency F1 and F2 RF sources. These two sources can be a single or dual band, narrow band, wideband (WB) or Ultra-Wideband (UWB) transmitters. Additionally, more than two sources can be used to provide more than two illuminating frequencies, if desired. The RF sources can be contained in a single multi-band transmitter or can be from separate transmitters.
HPM signal with center frequencies F1 and F1 are transmitted into the atmosphere via antennas or apertures 42 and 46, respectively. The HPM signal operating on frequency F1 undergoes propagation 43 through the atmosphere and possibly some soil as well. The HPM signal operating on frequency F2 likewise undergoes propagation 47 through the atmosphere and possibly some soil as well. Lower frequencies can be used for detection, location, and disablement or destruction when soil penetration is necessary (such as when the IED is buried or partially buried).
As indicated in blocks 44 and 48, frequencies F1 and F2 may encounter shielding that interferes with their desired coupling to the intended target, e.g., an IED. The use of high power microwave radiation enhances the likelihood of such coupling. Shielding can be part the IED or can be environmental, e.g., soil, water, rock, minerals, vegetation, or signage (such as metal road signs).
Remotely detonated IEDs can generally have an antenna by which it receives a radio frequency detonation command. Generally, this antenna can be exposed and thus susceptible to coupling with transmitted frequencies F1 and F2.
The result of coupling into the intended target 44 can produce mixing and frequency conversion 35 by non-linear components of the target. Such non-linear components can be diodes and transistors of a detonator that is remotely controlled by radio frequency. This mixing can result in a sum frequency of F1+F2 and a difference frequency of F1−F2 being generated and re-radiated towards the illuminating air platform. It can also result in various harmonic frequencies being produced and re-radiated. All of these resultant frequencies can, to some degree, be re-radiated. Typically, the sum frequency and/or the difference frequency can be the frequency or frequencies used for IED detection.
Generally, the sum and difference frequencies can have higher amplitudes than the harmonic frequencies. Also, it is often difficult to predict which harmonic frequencies can have the greatest amplitude; hence, the generation and use of laboratory/filed test signature data is invaluable for later use onboard the countermeasure air platform. Therefore, in many cases the sum and/or difference frequency signals can be used for IED detection, rather than any of the harmonic frequencies. However, the harmonic frequencies may be used instead of or in addition to the sum and/or difference frequencies. Indeed, in some instances the harmonic frequencies may provide enhanced detection, verification, and/or location with respect to the sum and/or difference frequencies.
The mixing and frequency conversion of block 35 results in target susceptibility 36 to high power microwave radiation. The target, i.e., the detonator of an IED, can be susceptible to detection and/or to being disabled or destroyed.
As indicated in block 37, radiation of the clock frequency of the detonator of an IED or of any other radio frequencies of the device can be detected remotely, such as from a flying aircraft or a land vehicle. Similarly, re-radiation of the harmonic, sum and/or differences frequencies can be detected. After detection and identification 38, electronic countermeasures can be employed to render the IED ineffective.
FIG. 5 is a block diagram illustrating an IED countermeasures system according to one embodiment of the present invention. According to this embodiment, a wide beam transmitter 150, a narrow beam receiver 153, and high power microwave burst transmitter 155 are used.
The wide beam transmitter 150 and antenna 151 define a high power microwave implementation in conjunction with the narrowband microwave antenna 152 and receiver 153 provides the required transmit/receive IED detection capability. Similarly, narrow beam transmitter 155 and antenna 156 can provide the required disablement/destruction functionality of the counter IED airborne system. Alternatively, a single transceiver or any desired combination of transceivers (such as a single transceiver taking the place of both the wide beam transmitter 150 and 151 and the narrow beam antenna 152 and receiver 153, but still using the separate high power microwave burst transmitter 155 and antenna 156) can be used. That is, any desired combination of transmitters and receivers can be used to provide for the transmission and/or reception of the wide beam, narrow beam and burst radio frequencies.
Further, the transmitters and receivers can either have a common antenna, each can have a dedicated antenna, or any desired combination of shared and dedicated antennas can be used. The antennas can be dish antennas, phased array antennas, or many other types of antennas. For example, wide beam transmitter 150 and antenna 151 and narrow beam antenna 152 and receiver 153 can use a shared phased array antenna to facilitate electronic beam steering and high power microwave burst antenna 156 can use a dish antenna for better power handling.
The frequencies of transmitters 150 and 155 can be selected such that they are effective in detecting, locating and disabling or destroying IEDs. These microwave frequencies of operation can be established by laboratory/field testing of likely IED systems. Microwave signal frequencies tend to have advantages in their directionality and in their ability to couple to the non-linear electronic components of IEDs as a result of high effective radiated power levels that are available in this frequency region.
High power microwave transmitters 150 and 156, and/or high power burst transmitter 185 can be variations of Airborne Active Electronically Scanned Arrays (AESA) such as the APG-79. Alternatively, these transmitters can be custom transmitters or any combination of contemporary transmitters, variations or modifications of existing transmitters, or custom transmitters.
A controller 157 can be used to point the wide beam transmit antenna 151, the narrow beam receive antenna 152 and/or high power microwave transmit antenna 156. Controller 157 can either use a general purpose computer or a custom controller. Alternatively, wide beam transmitter 150, narrow beam receiver 152 and/or high power microwave transmitter 156 can be manually controlled.
Controller 157 will set detection transmitter 150's waveform, power level, its duty cycle and the effective radiated power emitted from its wide beam antenna 151. Controller 157 will set disablement burst transmitter 155's power level, its waveform, its duty cycle/burst duration and the effective radiated power emitted from its narrow beam antenna 156. Controller 157 will also set select receiver 153's frequency range, bandwidth and scan parameters as well as narrow beam receiver antenna 152's pointing angles and scan parameters
Thus, once detected, the presence of an IED can be verified. Once verified, its location can be more precisely defined. Then, the IED can be rendered ineffective by directing a burst of high power microwave radiation, such as via a narrow beam thereof, at the IED. Additionally, the IED can alternately be rendered ineffective by one or more means by using gunfire against it, such as with a gun mounted upon an airborne vehicle; by dropping ordinance upon it from an airborne vehicle; or by conventional explosive ordnance disposal methods (such as disarming and disposing of the IED or by detonating it in place with additional explosives).
FIG. 6 is a flow chart illustrating operation of an exemplary embodiment of an IED countermeasures system of the present invention, such as that shown in FIG. 5. A signal containing two or more frequencies of high power microwave radiation is directed toward a suspect area, such as along roadway 13 of FIGS. 1-3. This can be performed with wide beam, dual band, high power microwave transmitter 150 and transmit antenna 151. This process can continue until an IED is illuminated, as indicated in block 61.
When an IED is illuminated with the two frequencies of high power microwave radiation, the non-linear components thereof can re-radiate electromagnetic radiation, as described above. When such re-radiation occurs, the frequency-shifted return can be detected. If no return is detected (such as when no IED is being illuminated), the process of illumination can continue, as indicated by decision block 62.
When a return is detected, the return can be verified as indicated by block 63. Verification can be performed by comparing the return to a database of known IED re-radiation signatures. That is, a signal comparison process can be implemented to match the spectrum and relative amplitudes of the re-radiated RF return compared to those stored in the database. A match can indicate a high probability that the return is from an IED.
If the return is not verified, the illumination of the suspect area with wide beam high power microwave radiation can continue, as indicated by decision block 64. If the return is verified as likely being from an IED, then narrow beam dual band high power microwave radiation can be used to better determine the position of the IED, as indicated in block 64. This process can be performed with narrow beam antenna 152 and receiver 153.
Higher frequency microwave radiation can be used in the location process. As those skilled in the art understand, the use of higher frequency microwave radiation facilitates the use of a narrower beam. A narrowed beam provides more focused reception such that when a return is received, the possible locations where the IED can be disposed are more limited.
Once the location of the IED has been determined, then a burst of narrow beam, high power microwave radiation can be directed to the IED so as to disable or destroy it, as indicated in block 66. Alternatively, other methods for disabling or destroying the IED can be employed. For example, gunfire or explosive ordnance can be used to render the IED ineffective, as discussed above.
According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, IEDs, even partially buried IEDS, can be found and rendered ineffective. IEDs can be detected with few false positive indications. Detection, location and disablement or destruction can all be performed from a platform that is far enough away form the IED so as to be safe, i.e., substantially unaffected by an explosion of the device.
The risks associated with the use of surface vehicles, such as the vehicles in convoy 14 of FIGS. 1-3, are substantially mitigated. The risks associated with explosives ordnance disposal are also mitigated. Thus, one or more embodiments of the present invention provide a robust system for mitigating the risks associated with IEDs.
Embodiments described above illustrate but do not limit the invention. It should also be understood that numerous modifications and variations are possible in accordance with the principles of the present invention. Accordingly, the scope of the invention is defined only by the following claims.
Previous Patent: System and method of event detection
Next Patent: GUIDING IR TEMPERATURE MEASURING DEVICE WITH PROBE COVER
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1046
|
__label__wiki
| 0.643524
| 0.643524
|
Happy Hen founder, Zoe Rosenberg (age 18) travels the country giving talks and leading protests to fight for the rights of farmed animals everywhere. As shown on the left, she gave her first keynote address at National Animal Rights Day in San Francisco when she was only 12 years old. Over the years since, she has given countless talks at events, marches, and rallies around the country, including her popular TED talk on animal activism. Zoe has also made national headlines for many high profile protests, including for chaining herself to the gate of a slaughter house in California, drawing attention to the use of the facility by California State University. Zoe was recently named Youth Activist of the Year by the National Animal Rights Conference in Washington DC.
LEVI STADIUM - PROTEST
2019 NCAA Football Championship Game
Zoe Rosenberg, at 16 years old, was arrested on live national television at the 2019 NCAA Football Championship Game in Levi Stadium (Alabama versus Clemson). Her brave protest was intended to draw attention to animal abuse in the factory farming industry and specifically targeted Levi Stadium because of their ties to a poultry producer that was accused of horrifically abusing animals.
Chained to a Slaughterhouse
At age 16, Zoe Rosenberg discovered that a major university in California had a working Slaughterhouse on campus and that students in certain animal related majors were required to take a class that involved slaughtering animals. Outraged she has organized many protests, drawing attention to this practice to the students, faculty, and media. One such protest involved chaining herself to the slaughterhouse gates, which resulted in her arrest. It also resulted in Zoe having direct conversations with the University president, the Student Government, and other members of the university community as she works to fight for change.
At age 15, Zoe Rosenberg gave an inspiring TED talk in front of 2000 people on the campus of California State University (CalPoly), recounting her experiences as an Animal Rights Activist starting from Age 11 and continuing through her entire youth. Although she was the only under 18 years old to present at the event, her talk was the only one selected by TED.com to be featured on their main site. You can watch Zoe's TED talk here.
The "Dodger Dog" Protest
At age 14, Rosenberg received national press attention for a bold protest against the Los Angeles Dodger regarding the treatment of animals related to the "Dodger Dogs" sold in the park. She and a few other activists ran onto the field during a game with banners and were arrested on live television. Arrested and jailed by the LAPD, Zoe refused to be intimidated, even when the police officers mocked her and said they would eat hot dogs in front of her.
Zoe leads a march in Berkeley California
To learn more about upcoming actions, protests, and marches, join Zoe's mailing list below.
Portland Veg Fest
Zoe speaks about the Animal Rights Movement and compares its progress to other social justice movements across history.
Zoe speaks about the Animal Activism in front of 1500 on the campus of California State University (Cal Poly) for TEDxSLO. Her talk can also be found on the TED.com website here.
Leaders of Transformation
Listen to Zoe Rosenberg on the Leaders of Transformation podcast, episode 306, where she discusses Animal Rights and the journey of founding and growing Happy Hen Animal Sanctuary (2020)
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1049
|
__label__cc
| 0.632469
| 0.367531
|
Free Dataloggers with monitoring subscription. Click Here for your 30-day free trial
Circulators / Baths
HAAS Portal
LIMS Portal
Study highlights the prevalence of alcohol use among cancer survivors
Home Industry News Study highlights the prevalence of alcohol use among cancer survivors
Reviewed by James Ives, M.Psych. (Editor) Jan 8 2020 New research in the January 2020 issue of JNCCN- Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network uses data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) from 2000 to 2017 to examine self-reported drinking habits among people reporting a cancer diagnosis. The researchers found that of 34,080 survey participants, 56.5% were current drinkers, 34.9% exceeded moderate drinking levels, and 21% engaged in binge drinking. This is the first large study to be done on alcohol use in the oncology population. Given that alcohol has been identified as a risk factor for several cancers (and contributed to 5.8% of cancer deaths in 2012), the researchers were surprised by how high those numbers were. We recommend that providers screen for alcohol use at regular intervals and provide resources to assist in cutting down use for those who may engage in excessive drinking behaviors. Typically, questions about alcohol use are just asked once when the patient first enters the medical system and then copied into subsequent notes as part of the patient's social history." Nina Niu Sanford, MD, Assistant Professor, Dedman Family Scholar in Clinical Care, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Department of Radiation Oncology For the purposes of the study, excessive drinking was defined as more than one drink a day for women, and more than two drinks a day for men, per CDC guidelines. Binge drinking was defined in the same guidelines as consuming enough alcohol to raise blood alcohol content to at least .08%, which generally means at least four drinks within two hours for women, and at least five for men. For this study, the researchers defined binge drinking as the consumption of at least five drinks in one day at any point over the past year. The authors noted that there aren't currently studies that establish safe levels of alcohol use when it comes to cancer risk, but studies have suggested the risk is higher for people who engage in binge drinking. Further examination of the data showed binge drinking rates were much higher for younger survivors. Among those age 18 to 34, 23.6% met the criteria for binge drinking, while only 2.6% of those 75-and-older reported the same. Likewise, survivors of cancer types that are more associated with younger people-;like cervical, testicular, head and neck cancers, and melanoma-;were more likely to report drinking at all levels, while drinking was much less common for survivors of breast cancer. Somewhat paradoxically, the researchers also found that better self-reported health correlated to more drinking. Related Stories
Also in Industry News
biotech healthcare
How to decide whether or not to start treatment for prostate cancer?
Analysis of the SARS-CoV-2 proteome via visual tools
$65m investment increases British Patient Capital’s exposure to life sciences and health technology
R&D office:
A 37392 Huckaby Ln, Murrieta 92562
Manufacturing office:
Industrial Park No 2, Greensburg, KY 42743
© 2021 Hardin Scientific, inc.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1050
|
__label__cc
| 0.729296
| 0.270704
|
Let's Talk Tax
Share Acquisition in 2016: Antitrust and Tax Compliance
The legal landscape for mergers and acquisitions in the Philippines has been developing at an unprecedented pace over the last few years. In July 2015, Congress passed RA 10667 or the Philippine Competition Act, and in June 2016, the Philippine Competition Commission promulgated the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the said law. While it is inaccurate to say that antitrust laws never existed in the Philippines prior to 2015, RA 10667 is the first comprehensive competition legislation in the country. It is also the first time the Philippines created a specialized antitrust body to enforce antitrust laws and prevent anti-competitive agreements.
With the recent passage of the implementing rules, now is the perfect time to provide a general overview on share acquisition procedures for corporations in the Philippines, it being the most common method for acquisition in the country.
The first step is often the negotiation and due diligence studies conducted by both parties. At this stage if the corporation is engaged in a nationalized activity, the primary concern is compliance with the nationality requirements in the Constitution, Foreign Investments Negative List and other industry-specific laws. If the target company is a public company as defined under the Securities Regulation Code, there may likewise be a need to comply with tender offer rules.
The second step is compliance with antitrust regulations. Under RA 10667 and its IRR, parties to a merger or acquisition that satisfy the thresholds in the law are required to notify the Commission before the execution of the definitive agreements relating to the transaction. The threshold is generally a transaction value exceeding P1 billion as determined under the specific provisions of the IRR. Prior to the submission of the notification form to the Commission, the parties are prohibited from consummating the transactions, but may request for a pre-notification consultation with the Commission. After submission of the notification, the Commission is given under the IRR a maximum total period for review of 90 days from the time the initial notification by the parties is deemed complete. When the periods expire without any decision, the merger or acquisition shall be deemed approved.
Determining whether or not a transaction is subject to compulsory notification is crucial because noncompliance with the notification requirement may subject the parties to a fine of 1% to 5% of the transaction value. In addition, the agreement entered into shall be considered void.
RA 10667 is a game-changing regulation because the Commission is given the power to prohibit the implementation of the agreement if it is a prohibited or anti-competitive agreement as defined under the law and it is not an exempted transaction. Because of a potential deal-breaking risk, which an unfavorable decision may bring to the transaction, antitrust studies are highly recommended to be regular part of due diligence reports by parties in M&A transactions.
Once approved, the parties may proceed to the execution of a deed of assignment between the transferor and the transferee of the shares.
The third step is payment of taxes. Generally, the sale of shares of stock in a Philippine corporation is subject to taxes. In order to transfer the shares from the transferor to a transferee, a Certificate Authorizing Registration which is proof that all taxes on the conveyance have been paid is required.
If the shares to be transferred are shares of a company listed and traded through the stock exchange, the transfer is only subject to a stock transaction tax of 0.5% of the gross selling price and is not subject to documentary stamp tax. On the other hand, for unlisted as well as listed shares not traded through the local stock exchange, the transferor must pay a capital gains tax of 5% on the first P100,000 net gain and 10% on the net gain over P100,000 realized plus documentary stamp taxes. Note that if the selling price is lower than the fair market value, donor’s tax must be paid at the rate of 30% of the difference between the FMV and the selling price if between corporations. If the seller is a non-resident foreign corporation, it may need to file a Tax Treaty Relief Application to avail of preferential rates under the applicable tax treaties.
Once a Certificate Authorizing Registration is secured, the Corporate Secretary may proceed with formally transferring the shares in the stock and transfer book.
It is a misconception that the Philippine Competition Act is only a concern of investors investing in large enterprises. Under the enforcement powers of the Commission, the Commission, motu proprio, or upon the filing of a verified complaint by an interested party or upon referral by a regulatory agency, shall have the sole and exclusive authority to initiate and conduct a fact-finding or preliminary inquiry for the enforcement of the law based on reasonable grounds. This general power covers transactions regardless of the transaction value. If it determines that the continued performance would result in a material and adverse effect on consumers or competition in the relevant market, it may issue an order for the temporary cessation or desistance from the performance of certain acts or even file a criminal complaint with the DoJ. Commonly known as antitrust litigation in other jurisdictions, it is noteworthy that this provision even allows private parties such as competitor enterprises to file verified complaints with the Commission for violations of the law.
As a final reminder, given the law’s impact on transactions, it would be prudent for all investors to seek professional advice before entering into a merger or acquisition in the Philippines.
Jantzen Joe C. Chua is a tax associate of the Tax Advisory and Compliance division of Punongbayan & Araullo.
As published in Business World, dated 20 September 2016
Lets Talk Tax
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0038.json.gz/line1052
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.